Share This Article
A bill recently introduced in City Council would prohibit the Parks Department from installing new swaths of artificial grass, citing the environmental and health impacts.
When Steven Giles’ wife, Pat Arnow, began to oppose the use of plastic grass in their community through the advocacy group she co-founded, East River Park Action, he immediately supported the cause.
Giles, who is now 77, spent a decade participating in the East Village’s softball league, where he played on both fake and real grass, and says the synthetic stuff just doesn’t hold a candle to the real thing.
“As a player you want to play on real grass because the plastic stuff is too hot and it just doesn’t feel right,” Giles said.
Plastic turf can run 35 to 55 degrees Fahrenheit hotter than natural grass on sunny days, and tends to contain toxic chemicals that can cause cancer or lead to reproductive issues. They also release plastic particles known as microplastics, that can make their way into bodies of water and several parts of the human body, including the brain, posing a potential risk factor for heart disease.
But a massive, ongoing rebuild of East River Park to accommodate flood resilience measures includes artificial turf on several green spaces, including four of its ball fields, a track infield and a multi use green area, according to designs approved by the Public Design Commission. Only three of the park’s new sports fields will be made out of natural grass, the plans show.
The move propelled Councilmember Christopher Marte to introduce a bill in the City Council last month that would prohibit the Parks Department from installing fake grass in New York City parks. The department says it currently manages 221 synthetic turf fields and play areas across the city.
“When I was a kid, I played on grass fields. I played baseball, soccer, and rugby. We know that this works,” Marte told City Limits.
The councilmember’s bill is the newest chapter in a long struggle carried out by lawmakers and environmentalists to convince city officials to ban artificial turf, claiming the downsides just don’t outweigh the benefits. But the petrochemical industry argues that because turf requires less maintenance, it costs less in the long run.
The Parks Department, which maintains the city’s fields, is grappling with budget cuts and staffing shortages, and turning to plastic fields may seem like the easy way out, according to Marte.
“Why are we taking a shortcut solution that we know has negative consequences on our communities?” he said.
Is it worth it?
The Synthetic Turf Council, an association that represents the industry, makes laying down plastic on large stretches of land sound inspiring. On its website, the organization says its goal is to “inspire and connect healthier communities through synthetic turf spaces.”
Their product is showcased as environmentally friendly because it uses less water and eliminates the use of pesticides often used to maintain natural grass. And the Turf Council argues the material is so durable it will save on costs over time.
Synthetic turf sports fields, the group notes, “can endure more than 500 event hours without repairs. In contrast, natural grass fields can only endure 100 event hours before needing repairs,” according to Keystone Sports Construction, a company that makes synthetic fields.
“Communities, schools, families, and businesses across New York City choose synthetic turf because of its significant benefits for sports, play, homes, and the environment,” Melanie Taylor, CEO of the Synthetic Turf Council, told City Limits in an email.
“A ban on synthetic turf will reduce access to play, increase water usage, and force communities, schools, and families in New York City to rely on high-maintenance, pesticide-dependent alternatives,” she added.
But plastic turf, which is made from climate change-inducing petrochemicals, is being falsely advertised as a better product than grass, environmentalists say.
“Artificial turf is where [the petrochemical industry] makes a huge amount of their money. This is a cash cow for the plastics industry,” said Dianne Woelke, board member at the non-profit Safe and Healthy Playing Fields.
A billion dollar industry, the artificial turf market is projected to reach $114.3 billion by 2028.
“So they make a huge amount of false claims about it. They claim, for example, that it saves water. But it absolutely does not,” Woelke said, pointing out that the turf gets so hot in the summer that it constantly needs to be watered to cool it off.
And installation costs are actually cheaper for natural grass.
The cost of installing artificial turf range from an estimated $4.50 to $10.25 per square foot and for an average football field that is 65,625 square feet, the price tag ranges from about $295,000 to about $673,000, according to a report by the University of Massachusetts’ Lowell Toxics Use Reduction Institute.
In contrast, the report notes, installing natural grass can range from $1.25 to $5.00 per square foot, which for a field of the same size would yield an installation cost ranging from about $82,000 to about $328,000.
Artificial turf does cost less when it comes to maintenance fees. Maintaining a synthetic field may cost about $4,000 per year in materials plus 300 hours of labor, while maintenance of a natural grass field may cost $4,000 to $14,000 per year for materials plus 250 to 750 hours of labor, the report found.
makes its way into New York’s East River.
Photo by Pat Arnow.
Plastic turf, however, needs to be swapped out every eight to 10 years, the industry admits, and it still needs to be tended to. That includes fluffing and redistributing the grass, periodically disinfecting it, repairing seams and replacing the infill—tiny beads of rubber that provide cushioning and support between the blades, like dirt does.
And then there’s the environmental problem, which experts say can’t be ignored. Christina Dubin, senior community organizer at the environmental group Beyond Plastics, said the infill, which she categorizes as a microplastic, will often “migrate off the field” when it’s rainy or windy, and end up in local bodies of water.
“We do see plastics from artificial turf in surrounding bodies of water out to sea,” she said.
Despite the downsides, New York City has had a long relationship with plastic turf, which City Limits investigated 15 years ago. Back in the early 2000s, the Bloomberg administration expanded a program called Green Acres that had already brought 12 artificial fields to the Big Apple’s parks.
And New York is yet to make inroads in fully banning fake turf. There is one law on the books in New York State that prohibits carpets, including artificial turf, from containing PFAS, hazardous long lasting chemicals that can be found in plastic.
But health and environmental advocates feel it doesn’t make sense to keep laying down more fake grass, and believe Marte’s City Council bill will help them get there.
“This bill can help make this whole city safer, healthier and more environmentally sound,” Pat Arnow of East River Park Action said.
To reach the reporter behind this story, contact [email protected]. To reach the editor, contact [email protected]
Want to republish this story? Find City Limits’ reprint policy here.
1 Comment
Soccer dad
Thank you for this article. My 10 year old daughter had 3 soccer games the past week. It was in the 70s and sunny. The first game in Sternberg Park in Williamsburg was incredibly hot, and they stopped the game to take a water break. The second game was at Calvert Vaux near Coney Island – this game was even worse – it was incredibly hot on the field and, I think the turf is different, and perhaps new, but it was off-gassing and you could smell the plastic vapors. It was awful. The kids were totally wiped out. The third game was on Randall’s island, which is grass. The difference was incredible. Granted Randall’s Island field was not well-maintained, which affected the quality of the game. In any case it is really awful to make kids play on a toxic plastic field. For all the handwringing about plastic bags and straws and stuff like that, this has a much bigger negative impact on the environment and is affecting city children negatively. Really hope Councilman Marte’s bill passes.