 |
Hosken Reserve: grass oval used for soccer training, informal reacreation, off-lead dog exercise (Photo by John Englart) |
Abstract:
The conversion of a grass oval to synthetic turf at Hosken Reserve, Coburg North, is about a failure in transparency and consultation with the local community, and poorly framed triple bottom line decision making by Moreland Council. There are questions about the integrity of the triple bottom line decision making embracing the social, environmental and economic impacts, costs and benefits, that was used in the process in the past decade for this site. And there are questions how triple bottom line decision making and weighting of factors will be applied for the current process.
This literature review provides numerous reasons why conversion of a natural grass oval and open space to a fenced synthetic soccer pitch should not take place. It finds that there are two primary reasons against synthetic turf at Hosken Reserve, and that either reason is significant in itself for the primary project not to go ahead. These two essential reasons are - synthetic turf carbon footprint (up to 1500 CO2e tonnes) in total life cycle greenhouse gas emissions, and synthetic turf increasing waste to landfill contributing to toxic leachates pollution and microplastics pollution. On both these grounds conversion of a shared use natural grass oval to synthetic turf would appear to conflict with existing Council policy and frameworks related to climate change and the climate emergency, and Council’s zero waste to landfill by 2030 target.
On the triple bottom line factors we found the social factors weighed up with some positive and some negative, the environmental factors were mostly against, and the economics didn’t stack up, even after factoring in 2 to 1 equivalence usage factor for synthetic turf. This review investigated peer reviewed science, grey literature and relevant policy documents to ascertain the following issues with synthetic turf::
- Derived from fossil fuel petrochemical industry
- Produces greenhouse gas emissions during manufacturing and as it degrades
- Increases landfill at end of life
- Produces microplastics pollution
- Increases urban heat island effect on local residents.
- Replaces natural grass which allows soil organic carbon sequestration, provides oxygen
- Reduces soil biota, grass seeds and insects with a trophic impact on local biodiversity primarily birdlife.
- Compacts the soil increasing stormwater runoff
- Toxic Chemical leachates from rubber infill pollute waterways
- Results in increased lower extremity injuries in elite players
- Long term human health impacts uncertain, but vertebrate model confirms toxicity to human health of rubber infill leachates
- Enhances infection transmission risk. Encourages a microbial community structure primarily defined by anthropic contamination.
- Appears to improve water conservation, but the situation is far more complex when life-cycle assessment and irrigation to reduce heat for playability is taken into account
- Other issues: increased fire risk, increase in traffic, parking on quiet residential streets
- Alternative Solutions
- Economic Costs
- Discussion
- Conclusions
The Climate Action Moreland full submission to Moreland Councillors and Hosken Refresh Consultation can be downloaded in PDF format (27 March 2021). This contained extra information regarding Hosken Reserve and Moreland Couuncil. The version below has extra references and minor updates but focuses on the science.
This document was researched and prepared by John Englart, Convenor of Climate Action Moreland and was subject to peer review by group members and other active members in the Moreland climate community.
Publication Date: 15 April 2021
DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28126.56646
Suggested Citation: Englart, J (2021), Literature Review on environmental and health impacts of synthetic turf., Climate Action Moreland, DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28126.56646