HOA LAW BLOG Asks:
“Are We Really That Opposed to Artificial Turf?”

An Editorial by

David C. Swedelson, Esq.,

Senior Partner, Swedelson & Gottlieb

Many of you received an urgent request by the California Legislative Action Committee (CLAC) for grassroots letters to be sent to the legislature opposing Assembly Bill 1793 (Saldana). I am not sure that I agree with what CLAC stated, and I really wonder if this is legislation that the CID industry should oppose.

[continued ...]

View the ASGi Artificial Grass & HOA Guideline PDF ONLINE – HERE
[continued ......]

I do not now personally have any artificial turf at my home, but I have considered it. I do have neighbors that have installed it, and my daughter’s school installed it on the athletic field. I do not have an interest in any company that manufactures, sells or installs artificial turf.

Today’s artificial turf looks a lot different than the “Astroturf” we may be familiar with. Esthetically, the newer products I have seen look like real grass. Even if I get on my hands and knees to check, it is hard to tell if it is artificial grass.

We should seriously consider every opportunity to conserve precious water resources in California, and this legislation is an excellent example.

The proposed legislation allows associations to set quality and esthetic standards for artificial turf, as long as it does not have the effect of prohibiting it outright, so there is no reason to believe that property values will be negatively impacted.

The bill was passed on the State Assembly floor with overwhelming support, 69 Ayes and only 1 No vote. AB 1793 is currently under review in the State Senate, and we will be supporting this bill.

CLAC set out a number of reasons we should oppose AB 1793, and I have to say that I do not agree with CLAC’s reasoning. CLAC’s letter stated the following reasons for opposing this legislation, and I have included my comments on each point.

(b)(2) This section shall not prohibit an association from applying landscape rules and regulations established in governing documents that establish design standards and quality standards for the installation of artificial turf, or any other synthetic surface that resembles grass, to the extent the rules and regulations conform with the requirements of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a).

AB 1793 provides for the following additions to Civil Code Section 1353.8:

1353.8(a)(2) [A provision of the governing documents shall be void and unenforceable if the provision] prohibits, or includes conditions that have the effect of prohibiting, the use of artificial turf or any other synthetic surface that resembles grass.

1. It singles out a class of property owners in common interest developments and may violate the equal protection clause of the Constitution.

I do not see how the proposed legislation that is designed to help owners that want to save water (which we should all agree is a good thing) will be singled out, and is this really any different then past legislation that requires community associations to permit the installation of low water-using plants and solar power systems?

2. Artificial grass may ruin a community’s curb appeal and reduce owner and neighbor’s property value.

I do not see how this is possible if the owners are required to use appropriate product. As I said above, I have seen artificial turf installed at some homes and elsewhere that looks so realistic that I have had to get on my hands and knees to inspect it up close, and even then, it was hard to see that it was not real. So what is the problem, so long as associations get to set standards? And think about the water savings, not to mention the environmental benefit from the absence of toxic chemicals (fertilizers, etc.) that will not be used and as a consequence, and which will not run off into our waterways.

3. Existing law already mandates local public agencies to adopt and enforce water usage by which CIDs must abide.

But what does this have to do with owners who want to remove their water-intensive, chemical dependent lawn and replace it with nice looking, always green artificial turf?

4. Civil Code 1353.8 already addresses water usage and landscaping in CIDs per AB 1061 (Lieu), which just became effective in January.

That legislation prohibits community associations from “prohibiting the use of low water-using plants as a group, as well as prohibiting or restricting compliance with a local water-efficient landscape ordinance or water conservation measure.” That legislation had nothing to do with artificial turf! Also, local ordinances may not necessarily address artificial turf.

5. It micromanages communities and overrides local control.

We seem to make this argument each time the legislature tries to pass a new law that impacts community associations (and the legislature has made about 47 changes to the Davis-Stirling Act since the mid 1980s when it was first adopted). In this case, the legislature wants to ensure that individuals have the power to choose whether to install artificial turf. CLAC’s use of the word “micromanaging” suggests that there will be no impact outside a particular community – to the contrary, water conservation benefits all of California.

6. It lacks definition of “grass”… what variety, color shade, seasonal vs. perennial, length?

The bill allows associations to set standards, so this is not really a reason to oppose the bill. An association might even choose to require a specific kind or type of artificial grass in its Rules and Regulations or Architectural Guidelines to ensure uniformity.

7. It statutorily promotes certain company products.

This is just wrong. I read the bill and do not see that it promotes any particular product. Why is CLAC raising this non-issue?

8. It does not address possible water runoff, flammability, and toxicity issues identified in various governmental studies.

I did a little checking, and apparently, there is a debate as to this issue. But my limited research showed me that on balance, artificial turf is less toxic than maintaining real grass. Growing grass requires chemicals, such as fertilizer, herbicide, and pesticides. These are potent chemicals that include numerous carcinogens.

So what about artificial turf? I read one report out of Connecticut from Environment And Human Health, Inc. (EHHI), which claims that EHHI did some testing that showed the release, when heated, of four potentially hazardous chemicals from the tire infill in synthetic playing fields. But EHHI’s report gives no details on that testing or their testing protocol.

It was suggested that the laboratory testing done by EHHI bore little relationship to the real world conditions where the turf is in the open air, and where any chemicals released most likely would be quickly dispersed. Moreover, those same chemicals are emitted from tires on highways, so they are already in the air.

9. CLAC suggests that this bill, if passed, will increase an HOA’s liability and generate lawsuits due to harm that can be caused by the toxic chemicals used in the manufacturing of the artificial lawns.

I do not see how this is possible. Liability for what? If the legislation is passed, community associations will be mandated to allow artificial turf. So, no one can expect to win a case against their association because it allowed another owner to install artificial turf when mandated to do so by the legislature.

Typically, community associations are not liable for any defects in construction that the association approves. Saying that a community association will be held liable for allowing an owner to install artificial turf is like saying that an association will be held liable for allowing an owner to plant poisonous oleander. Following CLAC’s logic, should there not be a huge backlog of lawsuits against associations for allowing owners to utilize toxic chemicals such as fertilizers on their real grass lawns? We are not aware of any.

=============================================

original post:

http://www.hoalawblog.com/2010/06/are_we_really_that_opposed_to_1.html

ASGi June 16, 2010 AB.1793, Artificial Grass, Bans of Turf, Calif Water, HOAs AB.1793, Artificial Grass, hoa, law, synthetic lawn No Comments

City of Fountain Valley Installs Artificial Grass Lawn – Sets New Watermark in Water Efficiency

Industry market partners sponsor job materials to insure project has latest solutions.

Hosted by the Municipal Water District of Orange County and the City of Fountain Valley, CA – ASGi CERTiFiED Class attendees installed 450 + square feet of artificial lawn grass in this suburban neighborhood on Currant Ave off Brookhurst (across from Mile Wide Park).

This ISLAND MEDIAN is an ideal location to use artificial grass for a lawn-like installation. Special care was taken, under the guidance of two arborists on staff at the City of Fountain Valley, to prepare the area and provide a wide tree ring, irrigation and mulch under the established, mature tree; featured in the center of the enclosed area, located at the bend in the street. This median’s maintenance and repair costs have just been dramatically decreased while taking a pretty island and making it even more beautiful for the enjoyment of all.

The MWDOC currently offers both residential and commercial water rebate programs when installing artificial grass and synthetic turf.

====================

ASGi CERTiFiED – May 2010 Landscape Project Pix

Professional Quality Landscape Grass
on an island median located on
Currant Ave & Brookhurst in Fountain Valley, CA.

================================

Thank you to our job materials, tools and equipment sponsors

Artificial grass surface materials:

INFILL

Fairmount Minerals – Flexsand(TM) Infill
SuperFiLL - Resin Coated Acrylic Infill

SEAMING

TurfBond – Seaming solutions (seaming tapes, adhesives for artificial grass)

SHIPMENT & Local Delivery

Spectrum Building Supply – pick up and delivery of pallets and rolls of materials

FABRICS, ROOT & WEED ABATEMENT
BASE MATERIALS, TOOLS & EQUIPMENT

Groom Industries – Grandi Rake and Handi Grandi Tools, Odor Control
HOGLUND – BioBarrier: soil stabilization, root control, weed abatement
HDTurf – sponsored base, tools, equipment and decorative rocks for Currant Ave
Landscape West - tools, equipment, materials
TerraFirma Landscape Management - Excavation, tools and equipment
City of Fountain Valley and Municipal Water District of Orange County: Excavation, site prep, modifications and job materials.

ASGi May 26, 2010 Artificial Grass, Artificial Lawn Grass, Bans of Turf, Water Savings, WaterSense - EPA Artificial Grass, Artificial Grass Association, california, city bans of, City Use, median No Comments

EPA: Recycled Crumb Rubber Infill OK
for Use with Synthetic Turf Sports Fields

http://www.epa.gov/nerl/features/tire_crumbs.html

The Use of Recycled Tire Materials on Playgrounds & Artificial Turf Fields

http://www.asgi.us/wp-admin/post.php?action=edit&post=775&message=6#post_name Posted: December 3, 2009

Downloadable Documents

Download “A Scoping-Level Field Monitoring Study of Synthetic Turf Fields and Playgrounds” (pdf, 123pp, 7.2MB)

Download a pdf file of the Tire Crumbs fact sheet. (pdf, 4pp, 29KB)

Background

Ground rubber — also called “tire crumb” or “crumb rubber” — is recovered from scrap tires or from the tire retreading process. It is used in road construction and in a number of athletic and recreational applications, including ground cover under playground equipment, running track material, and as a soil additive on sports and playing fields.

Crumb rubber is often used in artificial turf fields as “infill” between turf fibers to provide stability, uniformity and resiliency to artificial turf fields. Artificial turf was developed in the mid-1960s and has since gained widespread popularity around the country. Synthetic turf was originally used in stadiums and on athletic fields for college and professional sports teams, but now is also used in municipal parks, golf courses, playgrounds, cruise ships, and airports. There is also a growing residential market.

According to the Synthetic Turf Council, artificial turf has been installed in approximately 4,500 U.S. fields, tracks and playgrounds.

Public Concerns

Over the past several years, a number of public concerns have been raised over the use of tire crumb materials in turf fields and playgrounds. For example, parents in Colorado were concerned about children carrying home small particles of tire crumbs on their clothing. About this time, high levels of lead were detected on some artificial turf fields in New Jersey.

EPA Research

In response to these concerns, EPA developed an Agency workgroup that initiated a limited-scale scoping study to test a study protocol and monitoring methods for generating environmental data associated with the use of recycled tire material on artificial turf fields and playgrounds.

As part of this evaluation, data were collected at a limited number of sites. The full study protocol was implemented at two synthetic turf fields and one playground. Additional samples were collected at four other synthetic turf fields and a second playground. Sampling sites were located in North Carolina, Georgia, Ohio, and Maryland.

It is important to have accurate and reproducible methods for measuring environmental concentrations of the components of synthetic turf fields and playgrounds. The study protocols and the majority of the methods evaluated were found to be appropriate for characterizing concentrations of tire crumb components in the environment.

On average, the concentrations of components monitored in this study were below levels of concern; however, given the very limited nature of this study (i.e., limited number of components monitored, samples sites, and samples taken at each site) and the wide diversity of tire crumb material, it is not possible to extend the results beyond the four study sites or to reach any more comprehensive conclusions without the consideration of additional data.

In reviewing the literature, EPA believes there is no definitive study that fully addresses all of the questions regarding safety considerations associated with the use of synthetic turf and/or crumb rubber fields. As a further complication, characteristics and performance of synthetic grass blades may need to be considered separately from those of crumb rubber infill. However, both the Consumer Product Safety Commission and the Centers for Disease Control recommend that young children wash their hands frequently after playing outside and always before they eat. EPA also recommends these practices.

The results from this scoping study along with results from other studies conducted by Federal, State, and local organizations, such as the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC); Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry; states including New Jersey, Connecticut, California, and New York; and New York City, will be considered by EPA to identify possible next steps to address questions from the public regarding the safety of tire crumb infill in ball fields and playgrounds.

A meeting is being planned for spring 2010 among interested federal and state agencies to share information about possible contaminant levels from tire crumb/synthetic playing surfaces and discuss whether additional research is needed.

Key Technical Findings from EPA’s Study

Key technical findings from the EPA scoping study are summarized below. It should be stressed that the fields were selected based on proximity to facilities of EPA’s National Exposure Research Laboratory. The results reported here may not be representative of environmental concentrations found at other sites.

The overall study protocol and many of the methods were found to be appropriate and could be implemented in the field. Several limitations are noted as follows:
- Collecting integrated air samples provided a high burden in terms of time and equipment.
- At any single site, there can be substantial variability in the materials used and the concentrations of contaminants measured. More work is needed to determine where to collect samples and how many samples to collect to fully characterize a given site.
- It was difficult to obtain access and permission to sample at playgrounds and on recreational fields. More work is needed to increase public and private owner participation if additional monitoring studies are to be conducted.

Methods used to measure air concentrations of particulate matter (PM) and metals were found to be reliable.
- Concentrations of PM and metals (including lead) measured in air above the turf fields were similar to background concentrations.
- Concentrations of PM and metals at the playground site with high play activity were higher than background levels.
- All PM air concentrations were well below the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for PM (150 micrograms per cubic meter). All air concentrations for lead were well below the NAAQS for lead (150 nanograms per cubic meter).

Methods used to measure volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in air were found to be reliable.
- All VOCs were measured at extremely low concentrations which is typical of ambient air concentrations.
- One VOC associated with tire crumb materials (methyl isobutyl ketone) was detected in the samples collected on one synthetic turf field but was not detected in the corresponding background sample.

Methods used to measure extractable metals from turf field blades, tire crumb materials, and turf field wipe samples were found to be reliable. However, the aggressive acid extraction procedure will likely overestimate the concentration of metals that are readily available for human uptake. Since understanding uptake is a key component in understanding risk, methods to determine bioavailable metal concentrations are still needed.
- Total extractable metal concentrations from the infill, turf blade samples and tire crumb material were variable in the samples collected both at a given site and between sites.
- The average extractable lead concentrations for turf blade, tire crumb infill, and tire crumb rubber were low. Although there are no standards for lead in recycled tire material or synthetic turf, average concentrations were well below the EPA standard for lead in soil (400 part per million).

Likewise the average extractable lead concentrations for turf field wipe samples were low. Although there are no directly comparable standards, average concentrations were well below the EPA standard for lead in residential floor dust (40 micrograms per square foot).

Additional information on the use of recycled tire materials

In the United States, a number of cities and states have engaged in varying levels of sampling, testing and evaluation of synthetic turf products.

In January 2007, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment issued a report, Evaluation of Health Effects of Recycled Waste Tires in Playground and Track Products. The report concluded that there appeared to be little long-term risk to human health.

However, in August 2007, the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station reported the results of a small ($2,000) study it conducted to evaluate tire crumb. The laboratory concluded that “under relatively mild conditions of temperature and leaching solvent, components of crumb rubber produced from tires (i) volatilize into the vapor phase and (ii) are leached into water in contact with the crumbs.”

In June 2008, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued a low-level public health advisory, due to the extensive publicity surrounding artificial turf. The Consumer Product Safety Commission investigated reports of lead contamination from artificial turf and, in July 2008, concluded that “young children are not at risk from exposure to lead in these fields.”

After a review of the literature, EPA identified a number of compounds or materials that may be found in tires, although not all are contained in every tire:

acetone
aniline
arsenic
barium
benzene
benzothiazole
cadmium
chloroethane
chromium
cobalt
copper
halogenated flame retardants
isoprene
latex
lead

manganese
mercury
methyl ethyl ketone
methyl isobutyl ketone
naphthalene
nickel
nylon
phenol
pigments
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
polyester
rayon
styrene?butadiene
toluene
trichloroethylene

Look here for other feature stories.

ASGi December 10, 2009 Artificial Grass, Crumb Rubber, EPA, Health & Environment, Infill Solutions, Lead & Heavy Metals, Testing, standards Artificial Grass, Artificial Grass Fields, artificial turf, Artificial Turf Georgia, Artificial Turf Market, crumb rubber hazards, crumb rubber infill, EPA, Grass Surface Info, green building, hazards, lead, synthetic grass, synthetic turf No Comments

FIFA President States – Future Secure for Synthetic Sports Fields

SportsField Management

Synthetic Surface Update

by Suz Trusty

Research, safety and the future of artificial turf

Recent announcements have once again put synthetic field systems in the spotlight. Perhaps the most assertive comments were made by Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) president Joseph S. Blatter on a German TV show, “Inside Sport” on October 5, 2009 and rapidly spread through the worldwide sports community. An excerpt from the German newspaper, “Die Welt” reports Blatter saying, “…that artificial turf is the ‘future of football,’ as well as claiming that ‘most countries around the world will play on artificial turf one day because it can be used 24 hours a day, seven days a week.’”

PHOTOS BY STEVE TRUSTY.

More research on grooming synthetic fields will add additional data to that already compiled.

Research will assess the impact of painting markings on synthetic surfaces as compared to markings incorporated into the playing surface.

Those comments followed the report of the conclusion of a study conducted by the German Sport University of Cologne, stating that, “well-maintained artificial pitches have no measurable effect on the game.”

Expanded sports field-centered research initiatives on the U.S. side are also creating a stir. Penn State has teamed with FieldTurf in a five-year commitment to sports surface research. Dr. Andy McNitt, associate professor of soil science for Penn State’s College of Agricultural Sciences, will serve as director of the new Center for Sports Surface Research.

The University of Tennessee (UT) has partnered with AstroTurf to create the Center for Safer Athletic Fields, geared to research comparing natural grass playing surfaces to synthetic turf systems. Key researchers for this center are Dr. John Sorochan, associate professor and turfgrass specialist with the department of plant sciences in the University of Tennessee College of Agricultural Science and Natural Resources, and Dr. Jim Brosnan, assistant professor and turfgrass specialist.

McNitt says the Penn State research will center on synthetic and natural turf systems, primarily outdoors, but with indoor study as research directs, and expanding into other sports surfaces, initially including track and basketball. The University of Tennessee will research outdoor systems, according to Sorochan.

Both centers are open to take on other partners in the future as they seek to broaden the research to explore all aspects that impact the surfaces and the athletes. Both will test a myriad of different synthetics, those commercially available and those in development. Sorochan says, “For natural turf, we’ll use five different rootzones with the transition zone grasses: blue, rye and bermuda.” Though Penn State is in the cool-season zone, McNitt says, “We do have some bermuda plots installed here that are doing well. Our window of testing is just shorter.”

Hot topics

Heat is an ongoing issue. Though it’s not a factor when it’s cloudy or during the evenings, it’s fairly well documented that, on sunny days, synthetic surfaces get significantly hotter than natural grass. The heat goes through the shoe and into the feet and must be dissipated. While efforts are ongoing in alerting trainers, coaches, athletes and parents to monitor this, research will focus on an effective way to control it.

Alternative infill products, such as this natural infill, will undergo testing for multiple factors.

Alternatives in infill will continue to be researched, with the heat issue one part of that equation. Additional testing will look at playability, hardness, wearability, off-gassing, leaching and how the various materials hold up over time.

Safety is a top topic, with both centers focusing on human movement and how the athlete and playing surface interact. McNitt says, “Traditionally, the kinesiologists’ research has gone to the bottom of the shoe, and our studies have gone to the bottom of the shoe. We’ll be wiring athletes and having them perform maneuvers and working with cadavers in similar studies to see the actions and reactions and gauge the effect of varying surfaces on different joints with different types of shoes and cleats. The challenge will be trying to limit all the other variables: temperature, moisture, all the maintenance procedures that impact natural turf and those with synthetics, such as the age of the system, the density of the infill and whether it’s been groomed recently.”

Some of the research will key on the environmental impacts for all types of surfaces, with many aspects to explore, including leachate, carbon sequestration, ecology and recycling. Research will include further study into off gassing, the release of certain volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by components of the synthetic systems and the crumb rubber.

Another hot topic is wear. Sorochan says, “We’ll be simulating multiple levels of wear from one sport to multiple sport fields, through all the levels of athlete size and skill, from premium game-only fields to daily use fields. We’ll factor in non-sports events, too. While we can’t simulate every condition, the transition zone does provide some of the extremes.”

Researchers will continue to study synthetic field system grooming techniques, timing and frequency under various conditions and field use levels.

Performance is a major issue, from the point of construction or installation throughout the life of the field. This encompasses multiple areas of research from the natural or synthetic materials used, construction and/or installation procedures and long-term maintenance.

Accessing the data

University-based research includes recording testing results with the data available industrywide. McNitt says Penn State has been tracking the results of grooming on synthetic surfaces for seven years, with all but the current year’s data posted on the Web site: www.ssrc.psu.edu.

Quantifiable research data can address issues that spark widespread public and media attention, such as the concerns about MRSA and synthetic turf. Two Penn State studies: A Survey of Microbial Populations in Infilled Synthetic Turf Fields, and Survival of Staphylococcus aureus on Synthetic Turf, also are posted on the Web site.

ASTM standards

The issue of lead content in synthetic turf fibers prompted action in multiple sectors, including field owners and producers, testing laboratories, university researchers and governmental regulatory agencies. Initially, there was confusion over testing procedures, as different results occurred from different methods. Additionally, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission asked the industry to remove all intentionally added lead from turf fibers. Subsequently, ASTM International formed a subcommittee to address these issues and has issued a new standard: ASTM F2765, Specification for Total Lead Content in Synthetic Turf Fibers. ASTM announced another task group has been formed to “address the environmental and health issues related to synthetic turf infill materials.

Moving forward

As research and testing move forward, and standards and certification set industry benchmarks, innovation is sure to follow. Researchers expect significant data to become available early in the process. Industry suppliers anticipate the ability to use this data to identify key areas of performance and make ongoing adaptations to integrate them into product development. Sports field managers will gain a greater body of knowledge for comparison of all sports field systems to more effectively assist their facilities in making decisions on new fields and retaining top performance on existing fields.

The author is a contributing editor for SportsField Management.

http://www.sportsfieldmanagementmagazine.com/article.php?id=4474

ASGi December 10, 2009 ASTM, Artificial Grass, CPSC, Crumb Rubber, ESTO, FIFA, Field Related Info, Heat, Market, Parks & Rec, Schools - Public & Private, Testing Artificial Grass, Artificial Grass Fields, artificial turf, Artificial Turf Georgia, Artificial Turf Market, ASTM, CPSC, EPA, Field Related Info, FIFA, Heat, lead, MRSA, synthetic grass, synthetic turf, Synthetic Turf Council No Comments

You’d Never Know It’s A Fake

Image via Wikipedia – monofilament fibers with
superfill an alternative infill to crumb rubber

Pick any suburb, any Sunday afternoon, and the sound you’ll mostly likely hear is the irritating buzz of lawn mowers, blowers and other gardening power tools. Yesterday I watched the guy across the street use a blower to blow every leaf in front of his house over to a stretch of curb in front of his neighbor’s house–an unbelievable waste of time and energy–polluting the air with a cacophony of the most grating buzzes and whirring. Who can enjoy a quiet afternoon when every dad on the block is competing to have the most manicured lawn?

And that’s just the noise. All of our lawns should be brown. We are under severe water restrictions here in Southern California and in many other parts of the country. Don’t even get me started on the weed killer. I’ve reached the point where Astroturf is actually starting to look good. And I’m not alone.

With water emergencies and mandatory restrictions in place in southern California, Texas, Florida, Georgia and other water-starved areas, fake grass is starting to look a lot more attractive to homeowners than it once was. In fact, it’s starting to look more attractive–period. Suburbanites are increasingly opting for synthetic grass, rather than resign themselves to a dull brown lawn (although the dandelions seem to able to survive no matter what) of the real stuff.

Synthetic turf came on the scene much fanfare in the 1960s, but it wasn’t until the 1980s, when the industry introduced a vastly improved second-generation product, that it gained more widespread popularity. According to the Association of Synthetic Grass Installers, a trade association based in Sacramento, sales of artificial turf for landscapes and putting greens–a category that includes residential lawns– landscape use has grown 35% annually for the past five years. [overall market growth (which would include sports fields) has been a steady 20% per year] States where sales are highest are Georgia, Florida, Texas, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, Washington, Oregon and, of course, California. Environmentalists were in favor of the water savings resulting from a lawn of artificial grass, but worried about toxic chemicals contained in it, like lead. (In April, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission looked into the possible health hazards of lead in artificial turf installed at schools, parks and stadiums across the country.) But the industry insists synthetic turf is safe and as demand for the stuff grows, the more stylish it becomes.

Manufacturers have heard consumers and are working to make artificial grass far more real looking and esthetically pleasing. They now offer complimentary colors for the natural grasses of different regions. In Southern California, for example, a lighter, Kelly green sells well; in Florida and Georgia, a dusty green-gray is popular. The grass is less shiny than what you’re used to seeing on the sports field and now there’s even a new product–called “thatch”–to help the blades stand up straighter.

Written by:

Eilene Zimmerman – Selling Science

Original post:

http://trueslant.com/eilenezimmerman/2009/08/30/youd-never-know-its-a-fake/

ASGi August 31, 2009 Artificial Grass, Artificial Turf Yarn Fibers Artificial Grass, Artificial Grass Lawns, artificial turf, Fake Lawn, green building, synthetic grass, synthetic turf, Water Savings, watersense, waterwise No Comments

Get-The-Lead-Out.Org – Industry Website for Artificial Turf Grass Products that Meet or Exceed National and State Standards

Go up and visit and find companies and products that meet or exceed national and state standards for lead (Pb) in artificial grass and synthetic turf yarns and fibers:
GET-THE-LEAD-OUT.org

ASGi August 14, 2009 Artificial Grass, Artificial Grass 4 Dogs, Artificial Turf Yarn Fibers, CPSC, Lead & Heavy Metals, Prop 65, cpsia No Comments

Calif AG Strikes Agreement To Limit Lead (Pb) in Artificial Turf Grass Yarn From Crystal Products, AstroTurf & SynLawn

Brown Creates Nation’s First Enforceable Lead Standards for Artificial Turf Grass Yarns

OAKLAND-Fighting to ensure the safety of children’s playgrounds and ball fields, Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today signed off on an agreement requiring Georgia-based AstroTurf, LLC, [Crystal Products Co., Inc. d/b/a SYNLawn, UGTH Equipment, LLC, General Sports Venue, LLC, and Synthetic Turf Resources, LLC (“Settling Defendants”), among the Defendants named in the complaint,] to virtually eliminate lead from its artificial grass, creating the country’s first enforceable lead standards for artificial turf products.

“As schools and daycare centers replace grass with artificial turf, extreme care must be taken to minimize lead exposure,” Brown said. “This agreement is the first of its kind and will help make playgrounds and ball fields safe for our children.”

In 2008, Brown filed suit against AstroTurf, Crystal Products, and SynLawn for excessive lead levels after testing by the Center for Environmental Health (CEH) found high levels in artificial turf products. Brown’s office independently tested AstroTurf and other artificial turf products and confirmed CEH’s findings. AstroTurf immediately took steps to begin reformulating its products.

Today’s consent judgment requires AstroTurf to reformulate its products so that they contain less than 100 parts per million (ppm), and to further reduce lead levels to 50 ppm by June 2010. Lab results found that some AstroTurf products contained more than 5,000 ppm lead. Lead was added to keep the colors vibrant over time. AstroTurf will be prohibited from selling any existing stock that doesn’t meet these standards.

AstroTurf will also provide a grant of $60,000 to the Public Health Trust to fund “wipe testing” of dislodgeable lead on artificial turf fields at daycare centers, schools and public playing fields in California. If the level of dislodgeable lead exceeds the specified replacement level, AstroTurf will provide replacement turf to the daycare center, school or public field at no cost.

AstroTurf will also provide a mailed warning to all customers who purchased its products in California in the past five years. The warning will (1) inform customers that the turf products contain lead; (2) explain “good maintenance practices” that can effectively reduce exposures to lead; and (3) advise the customers of the availability of the program to test and replace old turf products. AstroTurf will also establish a website to provide information to the public on lead content in its products.

The Los Angeles City Attorney and Solano County District Attorney joined Brown in the case against AstroTurf. In addition to its obligation to replace products that exceed acceptable lead levels, the company will pay $170,000 in civil penalties, grants and attorney fees.

“Today’s agreement with AstroTurf sets a strong standard for other companies who have not yet agreed to eliminate lead risks to children from turf,” said CEH Executive Director Michael Green. “Lead is a stunningly toxic chemical that has no place in playing fields for children. We applaud the Attorney General, the LA City Attorney, the Solano County DA and AstroTurf for this accord to protect California’s children.”

For More Information Please Contact Calif AG’s office at:
(916) 324-5500

Download a copy of the PROP 65 Consent Judgment HERE

ASGi August 14, 2009 ASTM, Artificial Grass, Artificial Grass 4 Dogs, Artificial Turf Yarn Fibers, Bans of Turf, CDC Info, CPSC, Calif State, Crumb Rubber, DWR-Calif, Daycare & Play Yards, Do It Yourself, EPA, Field Related Info, General Conformity Certificate (GCC), Great Questions, HOAs, Health & Environment, Industry News, Infill Solutions, Lead & Heavy Metals, Market, NELAP Certified Lab, OSHA, PE & PP Yarn Fibers, PP Yarn Fibers, Parks & Rec, Prop 65, Schools - Public & Private, Testing, cpsia, lawsuits, standards Add new tag, Artificial Grass, Artificial Grass Association, Artificial Grass Fields, artificial grass install guide, artificial turf, Artificial Turf Georgia, artificial turf information, Artificial Turf Market, california, Field Related Info, hazards, heavy metals, Prop 65 Artificial Turf Settlement, synthetic grass, synthetic turf, Synthetic Turf Council, Testing No Comments

Benefits of Artificial Grass and Synthetic Turf Solutions

Special Report (PDF Format): Benefits of Artificial Grass and Synthetic Turf Solutions for Sports Fields, Putting Greens, Golf, Bocce, DayCare, Parks and Recreation, Landscape, Lawns, Kennels (dogs),

Compliments of ASGi Members
Available in our Public Download Library

artificial grass turf benefits PDF Download – Special Report: Benefits of Artificial Grass Solutions

You may be asked to LOGIN before download.

Not REGISTERED Yet?

You will have a chance to register before the download for ASGi’s FR.EE Public Download Library Pass

JOIN as a Full ASGi Member – it’s only $248 per year and everyone is welcome as a General Member!

ASGi July 19, 2009 ASTM, Air Quality Standards, Artificial Grass, Artificial Grass 4 Dogs, CPSC, EPA, GREEN, GreenScapes-EPA, Health & Environment, LEED Program, cpsia Artificial Grass, Artificial Grass Association, artificial grass install guide, Artificial Grass Lawns, artificial turf, Benefits of Artificial Grass Turf, Environmental Benefits of Artificial Grass Turf, grass, GREEN, green building, synthetic grass, synthetic turf No Comments

Artificial Grass: Beating the Heat – Safety Tips for Installers

Health and Heat

Safety Meeting Topic: OSHA – HEAT RELATED ILLNESS

Employees exerting themselves physically in the heat could be at risk of heat illness; a simple review of some handy safety tips with employees and/or end-users can make all the difference.

ASGi June 23, 2009 Artificial Grass, Heat Artificial Grass, Artificial Grass Lawns, Artificial Turf Georgia, artificial turf heat, Artificial Turf Market, crumb rubber infill, synthetic grass, synthetic turf, Synthetic Turf Council, Testing No Comments

Building Green Includes Artificial Grass Turf

Building Green in California Entering New Era

As the trend toward Building Green gains momentum, California – with its eye on harmful carbon dioxide emissions as well as recurring drought conditions and other environmental woes – remains ahead of the curve in encouraging businesses and individuals to reduce overall energy usage, which is a common measurement of green building. The state’s Green Building Regulations that go into effect on July 1 require a gradual 15% reduction in overall energy use, the equivalent of achieving the LEED® silver rating for new construction for the entire state. Construction and landscaping alternatives that are as varied as Energy Star-certified home appliances, elevators that move only when passengers are present, and artificial grass for water-saving landscaping are all part of the building green movement in California. Before California adopted its Green Building Regulations, the standard for green and sustainable buildings in California and nationwide was and still is set by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), a nonprofit organization. The California Sustainability Alliance says the state’s Green Building Regulations are the most aggressive energy and environmental goals in the nation. “The good news,” the Alliance says, “is that many different types of resources and support are now available to help us achieve these ambitious goals.” Developers have gradually taken advantage of those “resources and support” to erect more green projects The first systematic study of the green building market in California – by the Burnham-Moores Center for Real Estate at the University of San Diego as reported by the online edition of the San Diego Tribune – found that a growing number of developers are putting up buildings meeting stringent environmental standards, and that tenants have been willing to pay top dollar to rent space in them. A study for the American Solar Energy Society determined that under an “aggressive deployment forecast scenario” more t …

less than 2 day(s) – Tuesday May,12 2009 @ 08:57 AM
More on Buildinggreentv.com