Submission on Synthetic Turf to Moonee Valley Council for JH Allan Reserve

The following submission to Moonee Valley Council was made 22 March 2023 regarding a plan to redevelop JH Allan Reserve, including a proposal to turn open space natural grass sports field to a synthetic turf soccer pitch. 

I followed my original submission with an addendum on 4th April due to new information before the consultation closed.

Even during that short time period a new scientific review and new research had become known regarding the threat of airborne microplastics, with synthetic turf implicated as one source for airborne microplastics. 

The redevelopment of JH Allan Reserve in Keilor East  was identified in the Moonee Valley Soccer Strategy presented to Council meeting in September 2022. The strategy identified opportunities to improve sports infrastructure at J H Allan Reserve. 

Upgrade to lighting using new energy efficient LED sports lights to the eastern sports field is under consideration to improve evening use and minimise light spill and glare.

Repurposing of the western sports field natural grass currently used as a cricket oval and open space to a synthetic turf soccer pitch is under active consideration. 

Once again we see Soccer driving the push for synthetic turf, without a consideration of possible alternatives, including new research on improved natural turf surfaces providing increased capacity.

"At this stage, no scoping or design work in relation to this potential development has commenced." said Moonee Valley Council. "initial estimates based on similar recent projects indicate this development would cost between $4-$5 million."

After 7-10 years the synthetic turf matting and infill will need to be replaced. Current cost for a soccer pitch synthetic surface replacement is $750,000 (Estimate for Clifton Park 2023/24 Merribek Council Capital Works Budget)

In Mid-2023 there will be a Report back to Moonee Valley Council following the completion of the community consultation process.

Having Milleara Gardens Kindergarten located next to the Western oval where the Synthetic turf conversion is proposed should also raise concerns in particular about possible urban heat impacts on learning and airborne microplastics pollution and childrens health. This was not included in my submission or addendum.

Submission for J H Allan Reserve community consultation

I would like to make a submission on the J H Allan Reserve upgrade and in particular, the proposal to convert a natural turf sports field to a synthetic field. I am not a resident of Moonee Valley and so confine my comments to the issue of synthetic turf. 

I have  gathered a great deal of information on the environmental and health risks associated with synthetic turf since 2020. 

My information is based upon scientific research and grey literature on synthetic turf. The environmental and health impacts of Synthetic Turf are an active area of study, so many of the research studies are relatively recent.

Table of Contents

• Background
• Literature Review: Synthetic Turf carbon footprint, environmental, health, microplastics and biodiversity impacts
• Organic infills
• Existing Trees
• Upgrade to natural turf
• Triple Bottom Line assessment
• Fluoropolymers and PFAS Chemicals in Synthetic Turf
• Conclusion
• Appendix I: Environmental impact of Synthetic turf by the numbers
• Greenhouse gas emissions and carbon footprint
• Urban heat
• Sports Injuries
• Microplastics, PFAS and heavy metals pollution
• Waste to Landfill
• Water Use
• Wildlife
• Carbon Sequestration of natural turf

• References:
• Addendum
• Airborne Microplastics and Health
• Other Research
• Conclusion

Background

In 2021 I researched in depth the environmental and health impacts of synthetic turf with regard to a proposed natural turf to synthetic turf conversion at Hosken Reserve, Coburg North, in Merri-bek Municipality. I published my findings in April 2021. 

Merri-bek Council subsequently dropped the proposed conversion of Hosken Reserve to synthetic, although it will upgrade the sports field to a fenced natural turf soccer pitch.

Merri-bek Council is currently conducting a Sports Surface Study to inform on issues with regard to sports surfaces in the municipality, including use of synthetic surfaces. The report is likely to be tabled at June or July 2023 Council meeting.

I was personally shocked at what I found in the scientific literature, which largely hasn't filtered through to Municipal Councils and School Districts in proposals to install synthetic turf surfaces.

The NSW Office of the Chief Scientist during 2022 investigated synthetic turf in public spaces. The Final report evidently has been completed but not yet published as of 21 March 2023. This report should help to inform on the use of synthetic turf. 

The Victorian state government has failed to address the environmental and health issues of synthetic turf with no updated guidelines from the 2010 Sports and Recreation Synthetic Turf guidelines. An enormous amount of peer reviewed scientific research has occurred in the last 13 years that means the state government guidelines are terribly out of date, and poorly informed.

Literature Review: Synthetic Turf carbon footprint, environmental, health, microplastics and biodiversity impacts

I detail in my literature review the major environmental risks:

1. Derived from fossil fuel petrochemical industry
2. Produces greenhouse gas emissions during manufacturing and as it degrades
3. Increases landfill at end of life
4. Produces micro-plastic pollution as synthetic turf breaks down
5. Increases urban heat island effect on local residents.
6. Replaces natural grass which allows soil organic carbon sequestration, provides oxygen
7. Reduces soil biota, grass seeds and insects with a trophic impact on local biodiversity primarilybirdlife.
8. Compacts the soil increasing stormwater runoff
9. Toxic Chemical leachates from rubber infill pollute waterways
10. Results in increased lower extremity injuries in elite players
11. Long term human health impacts uncertain, but vertebrate model confirms toxicity to human health of rubber infill leachates
12. Enhances infection transmission risk. Encourages a microbial community structure primarily defined by anthropic contamination.
13. 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
14. Other issues: increased fire risk.

You can read my 2021 Literature Review on my blog here: https://takvera.blogspot.com/2021/04/literature-review-synthetic-turf-carbon.html 

There is also a downloadable academic version on the Research Gate website, which has had over 1,000 reads. (PDF) Literature Review on environmental and health impacts of synthetic turf. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350886618_Literature_Review_on_environmental_and_health_impacts_of_synthetic_turf  [accessed Mar 21 2023].

Organic infills

Although these are better than recycled rubber crumb in terms of toxic chemicals, they still pose a number of risks. They will likely be treated with a fungicide or bacterial agent before use, and will require regular maintenance treatments. Health risk needs to be assessed. Environmental risk needs to be assessed. Loss of infill is still likely to occurr. 

Based on the Swiss/German study annual loss may be in the range of  1.29 to 4.67 metric tons per year. Filtration systems and catchment traps may capture some of this infill, but it is still likely for some to escape through human transport via shoes and clothing, and some to the local environment where it will make it’s way into local water systems adding to microplastics impact on local ecosystems.

Existing Trees 

Very concerning that a significant number of existing trees would likely be impacted and be chopped down. This is a loss of biodiversity values which would take perhaps several decades to recover from offset tree planting. This at a time of accelerating urban heat, currently 9.63º C above baseline for Moonee Valley.

Upgrade to natural turf

Rather than synthetic turf, upgrading the existing natural turf, including drainage, irrigation, use of industrial grade compost, may increase the weekly sports hours capacity, and at much less cost. 

I refer you to the work of Lambie and Battam on Creating Sustainable Open Spaces - Using Compost to Deliver Liveability, Sustainability, Recreation and Economic Outcomes (2020). https://agenviro.com/473_Ozwater20_Technical_Paper_Paul_Lamble_Revised.pdf 

Triple Bottom Line assessment

There does not appear to be a triple bottom line assessment of positive and negative factors with conversion of a sports field to synthetic turf. Such assessment should weigh up all the social, environmental and economic costs, impacts and benefits. My recommendation is such an assessment should be done before proceeding further.

Fluoropolymers and PFAS Chemicals in Synthetic Turf

Since I published my literature review in April 2021 I have become more concerned from reports and research in the USA and Europe that manufacture of synthetic turf involves Fluropolymer/PFAS "forever chemicals". It is likely present in all synthetic turf. 

My concern over microplastics generated from Synthetic turf has also grown. Three facts (see Appendix 1):

2.98 metric tons - average loss of performance infill on the examined pitches per year (Germany/Switzerland), and above the top-up quantity (2.68 metric tons per year). However, there are significant fluctuations in losses. The 95% confidence interval for losses for all pitches of the same construction type is in the range of 1.29 to 4.67 metric tons per year. (Bertling et al Oct 2021) 1–4% of plastic infill is lost and replaced every year (Report for FIFA Eunomia Research 2017)

50 kilograms to over 1 metric ton fibre loss per year - average fibre loss from a pitch contributing to microplastics pollution.  (Bertling et al Oct 2021)

0.315–17.439 kg of Fluorine per field. Signature chemical that indicates possible presence of PFAS class of chemicals and Fluoropolymers. Samples were from 17 fields in Stockholm, Sweden, a variety of infills including sand and of various ages from different manufacturers. Fluorine detected in every sample of backing, infill and fibres. Authors postulate this problem may be a global issue with synthetic turf. (Lauria et al 2022) 

European research indicated the PFAS chemicals were in an unextractable form, however this still poses an environmental problem with the weathering of synthetic fibres through wear and tear and UV light. It also poses an issue for any attempt to recycle end-of-life synthetic turf, perpetuating the contamination.

Lauria, Mélanie Z., Ayman Naim, Merle Plassmann, Jenny Fäldt, Roxana Sühring, and Jonathan P. Benskin, (July 2022) Widespread Occurrence of Non-Extractable Fluorine in Artificial Turfs from Stockholm, Sweden, Environmental Science & Technology Letters 2022 9 (8), 666-672 

DOI: 10.1021/acs.estlett.2c00260 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.estlett.2c00260 

Comment: I was aware of reports of PFAS in Synthetic Turf in the US from October 2019 when I did my literature review on synthetic turf in 2021, but chose not to include that detail as the information was very early and not peer reviewed. This peer reviewed study raises questions about whether PFAS class of chemicals is in synthetic turf in Australia? As PFAS chemicals are biopersistent and bioaccumulate, it poses questions of direct or indirect human and environmental impact. As PFAS is a forever chemical, when artificial turf is disposed of as landfill or recycled it poses an environmental pollution problem.. The study highlights that fluorine signatures were found in all 17 fields sampled in all samples of the backing, filling and blades. (variety of infills including 2 with sand mixed with an unidentified filling material). While the fluorine appears stable, not enough is yet known of it;s fate when subject to weathering. Questions remain over PFAS contamination during disposal or recycling of synthetic turf backing, blades and infill.

See the last section of the paper (in full): “Implications for Human and Environmental Exposure

“While TF concentrations in ATs are considerable, the observation of poor extractability and recalcitrance toward advanced oxidation suggests that leaching and/or conversion to mobile PFAAs is limited over the lifetime of an AT and/or following accidental ingestion of AT components. (35) However, further work is needed to investigate the fate of PFAS in plastics during weathering (e.g., by ultraviolet light), and caution is warranted when selecting plastic materials for use in AT to ensure they do not contain side chain fluorinated polymers (SFPs). While SFPs were not detected in ATs from this study (based on TOP results), they occur widely in plastics (in particular textiles) and may transform into PFAAs during weathering. (36) Filling (and to some extent blades) also remains a highly problematic component of AT considering its potential to disperse into the environment as micro/nanoplastic (estimated between 1638 and 2456 t of filling in Sweden in 2016 (18)), and considering the recent discovery of nanoplastics in human blood. (37) Finally, concerns surrounding the production and end of life of AT remain. ATs analyzed in this study contained 0.315–17.439 kg of F per field (see Table S5 and Figure S4), which, when extrapolated to all fields in Stockholm, amounted to a sum total of 84.45–1557.16 kg of F that will eventually be landfilled or incinerated. Landfills are known sources of PFAS and microplastics, (38−40) and the effectiveness of incineration for destroying PFAS remains unclear. (41−44) The alternative, recycling of AT, is still a developing industry (45) but will continue to be complicated by the use of PFAS and other additives in plastics, (46,47) some of which will occur as impurities in recovered materials. (48) Because manufacturers of the ATs investigated here are not exclusive to Sweden, we believe these results to be broadly translatable to ATs globally. Further research into the occurrence, stability, and environmental fate of PFAS in ATs, and plastics in general, is needed to better understand the implications of (re)use and disposal of AT components.”

Lohmann, Rainer.,  Ian T. Cousins, Jamie C. DeWitt, Juliane Glüge, Gretta Goldenman, Dorte Herzke, Andrew B. Lindstrom, Mark F. Miller, Carla A. Ng, Sharyle Patton, Martin Scheringer, Xenia Trier, and Zhanyun Wang, (Oct 2020) Are Fluoropolymers Really of Low Concern for Human and Environmental Health and Separate from Other PFAS?

Environmental Science & Technology 2020 54 (20), 12820-12828, DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.0c03244, https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.0c03244 

Comment: A very technical article on Fluoropolymers, questioning their use in industrial processes and manufacturing and highlighting the concern of fluoropolymers impact on environment and human health. The study doesn’t specifically mention use of fluoropolymers in manufacture of artificial grass, but (Lauria et al 2022)  makes that link. The study methodically documents use of Fluoropolymers and their impact in several sections:

    • History of Pollution from Fluoropolymer production is closely tied to use of PFAS as polymer processing aids

    • Substitute Fluoropolymer processing aids raise similar concerns 

    • Monomer, Oligomer and Synthesis Byproduct Emissions during the production of Fluoropolymers 

    • Leaching of Low-molecular-weight PFAS from Fluropolymers during process and Use. 

    • Toxicity of Fluropolymer processing aids, monomers, and Oligomers 

    • Penetration of cell membranes by Macromolecules

    • Persistence and Disposal of Fluoropolymers 

    • Can Fluoropolymers be considered separately from the use of PFAS as processing aids?

    • Are Fluoropolymers Polymers of low or High Concern? 

In the final point on whether we should be concerned with Fluoropolymers the researchers argue “The concerns we present above suggest that there is no sufficient evidence to consider fluoropolymers as being of low concern for environmental and human health. The group of fluoropolymers is too diverse to warrant a blanket exemption from additional regulatory review. Their extreme persistence and the emissions associated with their production, use, and disposal result in a high likelihood for human exposure as long as uses are not restricted.”

The researchers conclude: “Our recommendation is to move toward the use of fluoropolymers in closed-loop mass flows in the techno-sphere and in limited essential-use categories, unless manufacturers and users can eliminate PFAS emissions from all parts of the life cycle of fluoropolymers."

Cousins, Ian T., Jana H. Johansson, Matthew E. Salter, Bo Sha, and Martin Scheringer, (Aug 2022) Outside the Safe Operating Space of a New Planetary Boundary for Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS), Environmental Science & Technology 2022 56 (16), 11172-11179 DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.2c02765 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.2c02765 

Comment: This study considered 4 PFAS related chemicals and concluded that rainwater globally is contaminated often above all drinking water standards. Because of biopersistence, these chemicals are likely to continue to cycle in the hydrosphere. Global soils are now ubiquitously contaminated. Contamination is  poorly reversible. Planetary boundary for chemical pollution now being exceeded. Recommends that “In view of the impacts of humanity’s chemical footprint on planetary health, it is of great importance to avoid further escalation of the problem of large-scale and long-term environmental and human exposure to PFAS by rapidly restricting uses of PFAS wherever possible.”

 Exceeding standards: “Levels of PFOA and PFOS in rainwater often greatly exceed US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Lifetime Drinking Water Health Advisory levels and the sum of the aforementioned four PFAAs (Σ4 PFAS) in rainwater is often above Danish drinking water limit values also based on Σ4 PFAS; (2) levels of PFOS in rainwater are often above Environmental Quality Standard for Inland European Union Surface Water; and (3) atmospheric deposition also leads to global soils being ubiquitously contaminated and to be often above proposed Dutch guideline values. It is, therefore, concluded that the global spread of these four PFAAs in the atmosphere has led to the planetary boundary for chemical pollution being exceeded.”

Reversibility?: “Levels of PFAAs in atmospheric deposition are especially poorly reversible because of the high persistence of PFAAs and their ability to continuously cycle in the hydrosphere, including on sea spray aerosols emitted from the oceans. Because of the poor reversibility of environmental exposure to PFAS and their associated effects, it is vitally important that PFAS uses and emissions are rapidly restricted.”

Concludes: “we conclude that PFAS define a new planetary boundary that has been exceeded, based on PFAS levels in environmental media being ubiquitously above guideline levels. Irrespective of whether or not one agrees with our conclusion that the planetary boundary for PFAS is exceeded, it is nevertheless highly problematic that everywhere on Earth where humans reside recently proposed health advisories cannot be achieved without large investment in advanced cleanup technology. Indeed, although PFOS and PFOA were phased out by one of the major manufacturers (3M) 20 years ago, it will take decades before levels in land-based water and precipitation approach low picogram per litre levels. Moreover, the problems associated with PFOS, PFOA, or Σ4 PFAAs are likely to be only the tip of the iceberg given that there are many thousands of PFAS in the class and the risks associated with most of them are unknown. 60 In view of the impacts of humanity’s chemical footprint on planetary health, it is of great importance to avoid further escalation of the problem of large-scale and long-term environmental and human exposure to PFAS by rapidly restricting uses of PFAS wherever possible. 61 Furthermore, as has been stated by ourselves 3 and others 7 before, society should not continually repeat the same mistakes with other persistent chemicals.”

EPA won't test synthetic turf but advise a precautionary approach should be taken if PFAS is suspected.

I contacted EPA Victoria in September 2022 referring them to recent reports and scientific literature from the USA and Sweden regarding PFAS in synthetic turf asking them to test locally manufactured synthetic turf for Fluropolymer signatures, or PFAS chemicals.

They declined to undertake testing. But said "While scientific research continues to be undertaken, EPA, consistent with federal guidelines from the Environmental Health Standing Committee (enHealth), takes a precautionary approach and advises people to reduce their exposure to PFAS."

Conclusion

I would urge Council Officers and Councillors to carefully consider the full environmental and health risks of converting a sports field at J H Allan Reserve to Synthetic. This submission highlights many of the problems found from reading the scientific literature. This is still an active area of research. 

Council should take a precautionary approach with regards to environmental and health risks of synthetic turf. 

There may also be liability risks if Council, being aware of potential and actual environmental and health issues, decides to proceed.

I can be contacted or meet with Council staff and/or Councillors to discuss in further depth any of this information.

--

John Englart

Appendix I: Environmental impact of Synthetic turf by the numbers

Here are some important science facts I have gleaned from my research reading. Note: some of these are already referenced in my literature review and same are from more recent research

Greenhouse gas emissions and carbon footprint

200kg CO2e emissions per square metre for synthetic turf per 10 years (Report for FIFA Eunomia Research 2017).

1500 tonnes CO2e for a FIFA standard pitch, average lifetime of 8-15 years. (Report for FIFA, Eunomia Research 2017)

Between 9.4 and 29.8 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalents per hour of use from a synthetic pitch. Carbon Footprint depends on the type of artificial turf. Study recommends “permitted values should be reduced to below 10 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalents per square metre.” (Bertling et al Oct 2021)

2.3 kW h m -2 day -1 of heat to the atmosphere - difference in replacing grass ground cover with artificial turf. “could result in urban air temperature increases of up to 4C” .(Yaghoobian et al 2010)

5 tonnes of CO2 per tonne of plastic. Context: the World Energy Outlook in 2019 notes that the CO2 emissions of the 4,500 mt of oil used in 2018 were 11,500 mt, or 2.6 tonnes of CO2 per tonne of oil; so plastic is responsible for roughly twice as much carbon dioxide per tonne as oil. Note: Each stage of the production of plastic (including synthetic turf) produces pollutants such as PM 2.5, SOX and NOX which are harmful to human health.(Carbon Tracker 2020)

Urban heat

93 degrees Celsius - infill synthetic turf on a day when air temperatures was 37°C (USA) (McNitt 2008)

84.5 degrees Celsius - Synthetic turf with 40 mm long grass blades (STlng-GR) was the hottest material in a Sydney study of different materials used in playgrounds (Pfautsch et al Aug 2022)

60.4 degrees Celsius - the surface temperature of Clifton Park synthetic turf measured on a warm 32C day, when the grass nearby measured 30.9C. (Englart, 3 November 2020)

Heat Burn injuries: 3 seconds at 77 °C, 5 seconds at 74 °C, within 1 min at 60 °C - Contact burns from hot plastic according to ISO 13732-1:2006, Note: standard is for adults, likely to be much less for children (Pfautsch et al Aug 2022)

11.2 degrees C - the average Artificial turf was hotter than turf grass in summer (Loveday 2019). “Evapotranspiration is assumed to be the main cause of this difference, as well as the perviousness of the natural turf grass allowing any moisture from the soil to evaporate up though the surface, providing extra cooling.” Siebentritt (May 2020) also found an 11 degree average difference between synthetic turf and natural turf.

8.30pm to 9pm - the time when artificial grass goes below ambient air temperatures in Perth, indicating close ground coupling (Loveday 2019).

1.85 degrees C - where surface materials (such as synthetic turf) lead to an increase in air temperature by this amount could produce an increase in local residential cooling energy use and utility costs up to 72% in Melbourne, 51% in Sydney and 48% for Adelaide. On the plus side, Synthetic surface may also provide a beneficial reduction in winter space heating (Siebentritt May 2020)

9.5286 degrees C UHI temperature anomaly for 2018 Clifton Park area (Merribek Council, Melbourne) that includes a synthetic turf pitch -. Previously 5.8557 UHI temperature anomaly in 2014 (DELWP website - Cooling and Greening Melbourne Interactive Map) Clifton Park synthetic pitch installed 2011, due for resurfacing in 2023/24 at a CAPEX cost of $650,000.. Moreland Council mean UHI was 9.2C according to Landsat data (Sun et al 2019)

Sports Injuries

16% increase in lower extremity injuries per play on synthetic turf than that on natural turf by elite players based on five years of USA NFL player injury data. (Mack et al 2019)

Microplastics, PFAS and heavy metals pollution

2.98 metric tons - average loss of performance infill on the examined pitches per year (Germany/Switzerland), and above the top-up quantity (2.68 metric tons per year). However, there are significant fluctuations in losses. The 95% confidence interval for losses for all pitches of the same construction type is in the range of 1.29 to 4.67 metric tons per year. (Bertling et al Oct 2021) 1–4% of plastic infill is lost and replaced every year (Report for FIFA Eunomia Research 2017)

50 kilograms to over 1 metric ton fibre loss per year - average fibre loss from a pitch contributing to microplastics pollution.  (Bertling et al Oct 2021)

1.2 tonnes of Zinc, a Neurotoxicant (from Crumb Rubber) in an average soccer pitch - “A typical soccer pitch/field can contain a total of 1.2 tonnes of zinc (assuming the rubber crumb has an average ZnO content of 1.5%). It has been estimated that under natural conditions 10−40% of the Zn could be released from the fine tire debris (<100 μm) mixed in soils within one year.” (Cheng et al 2014) Zinc (Zn) was the prevalent metal found in crumb rubber infill - up to 15,494 mg/kg in CR and 34,170 μg/L in water leachates (Gomes et al 2021)

300 chemicals identified in Crumb Rubber synthetic turf infill, of which nearly 200 are predicted to be carcinogenic and genotoxic. (Xu et al 2019) “majority of these potential carcinogens are not listed in the databases of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) nor the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) due to the absence of toxicological evaluation …This study points to a need to closely examine the potential regulation of the use of CR on playgrounds and artificial fields.”

5% microplastic content in soil - has been shown at this level and above to impact native grass growth and survival.(Van Kleunan et al 2019)

0.1–5 g of microplastics ingested per week by each human - first order global average weekly estimate of microplastics (from all sources) ingested by humans through various exposure pathways (Senathirajah et al 2021)

1.6 µg/ml concentration of nanoplastics found in human blood - “mean of the sum quantifiable concentration of plastic particles in blood was 1.6 µg/ml.” Polyethylene terephthalate, polyethylene and polymers of styrene (a sum parameter of polystyrene, expanded polystyrene, acetonitrile butadiene styrene etc.) were the most widely encountered microplastics. Synthetic turf fibres are commonly Polyethylene. (Leslie et al March 2022)

microplastics <75 μm are very capable of accumulating within the human body. “These early findings suggest that there is a potential threat to human health.” (Boyle et al Sep 2020)

0.315–17.439 kg of Fluorine per field. Signature chemical that indicates possible presence of PFAS class of chemicals and Fluoropolymers. Samples were from 17 fields in Stockholm, Sweden, a variety of infills including sand and of various ages from different manufacturers. Fluorine detected in every sample of backing, infill and fibres. Authors postulate this problem may be a global issue with synthetic turf. (Lauria et al 2022) PFAS chemicals are  biopersistent and bioaccumulate, called ‘Forever Chemicals’ and scientists now postulate a new planetary boundary of PFAS being exceeded. (Persson et al 2022)

Microplastics as a virus vector: “98 per cent of the virus we used was found on the microplastic, and over half of the viruses could still be detected 10 days later, much longer than if the virus particles were free-floating in the water,” Dr Lu said - “our findings highlight that microplastics are associated with the biological risks of water-borne viral transmission through virus adsorption.” (Lu et al, October 2022)

75 % of fish around southern New Zealand found to have ingested microplastics. An average of 2.5 individual particles per fish. Microplastic fibres most commonly ingested. 99.68% of plastics identified were smaller than 5 mm.In nine fish species polyethylene and polypropylene found to be the most common plastic polymers ingested. (Clere IK et al Sep 2022)

Waste Incineration

Incineration of non-degradable poly(vinyl chloride) and poly(ethylene terephthalate) emitted 10–115 and 6–22 ppmv of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), respectively. “During the evaluation of gas barrier films employed for food packaging purposes, non-degradable aluminum-coated multilayered films emitted 9–515 ppmv of VOCs, compared to the 2–41 ppmv VOCs emitted by biodegradable nanocellulose/ nanochitin-coated films. Despite the significantly lower levels of VOCs emitted during the incineration of biodegradable plastics, this does not represent suitable waste treatment solution because VOCs are still emitted during incomplete combustion.” (Park et al, Sep 2022)

Incineration: 360 to 102,000 microplastic particles left in the bottom ash Per metric ton of plastic waste incinerated. “an abundance of 1.9–565 n/kg, which indicated that per metric ton waste produce 360 to 102,000 microplastic particles after incineration. Nine types of plastics were identified, of which polypropylene and polystyrene were the predominant types. Microplastics sized between 50 μm and 1 mm accounted for 74 %. Granules, fragments, film, and fibers accounted for 43 %, 34 %, 18 %, and 5 % of the microplastics, respectively…. Our observations provide empirical evidence proving that incineration is not the terminator of plastic waste, and bottom ash is a potential source of microplastics released into the environment. (Yang et al Jan 2021)

Waste to Landfill

274 tonnes is how much waste a FIFA sized pitch plastic carpet and infill generates to landfill as waste at end of life. (8-15 years), that will break down into microplastics, nanoplastics, potentially leach out polluting into waterways and terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. (Report for FIFA Eunomia Research 2017). This includes over 300 chemicals in crumb rubber infill, over 200 of which may be carcinogenic and genotoxic (Xu et al 2019), and including 1.2 tonnes of Zinc (Cheng et al 2014),  0.315–17.439 kg of Fluorine as Fluoropolymers (Lauria et al 2022) leading to PFAS contamination in any subsequent recycling, or release of PFAS chemicals if incinerated.. 

Water Use

4,985 kGal of water to manufacture one synthetic field, just under 4 years worth of water irrigation for a natural turf field at 1,290 kGal per year in the USA (Alm May 2016) Note: once you factor in regular irrigation of synthetic turf pitch for cooling or new 4th gen organic infill, water use is comparable between synthetic and natural turf during maintenance phase of total life cycle (Kanaan 2020)

Wildlife

“Significant reduction” - impact on birdlife abundance in parks affected by remodelling works that included artificial surfaces while in those non-remodelled it remained stable, according to a 2020 Spanish study (Bernat-Ponce et al 2020)

Carbon Sequestration of natural turf

38,000 trees to plant and need to survive - to mitigate one FIFA standard synthetic football pitch at 0.039 tonne CO2e carbon sequestration per tree (Meil & Bushi, 2006).

0.31 kg of CO 2eq /year/m 2 - potential natural turf carbon sequestration. “The one, five and ten year scenarios yielded a sequestration rate per year per square meter of turf of 0.905, 0.375 and 0.308 kg CO 2 respectively for recreational turf. Due to the higher maintenance requirements of sports turf the only scenario with net CO 2 sequestration was the one year scenario at 0.01 kg CO 2 /m 2 .y." (Cumming Feb 2020)

References:

    • Alm, Abigail.,  (May 2016), Is Synthetic Turf Really “Greener”? A Lifecycle Analysis of Sports Fields Across the United States, Undergraduate thesis, Carthage College, Kenosha, Wisconsin https://dspace.carthage.edu/handle/123456789/5520  

    • Bernat-Ponce, E., Gil-Delgado, J.A. & López-Iborra, G.M. Replacement of semi-natural cover with artificial substrates in urban parks causes a decline of house sparrows Passer domesticus in Mediterranean towns. Urban Ecosyst 23, 471–481 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-020-00940-4  

    • Bertling, Jürgen; Dresen, Boris; Bertling, Ralf; Aryan, Venkat; Weber, Torsten (Oct 2021) Artificial turf pitches – System analysis for Switzerland and Germany taking into account microplastic and greenhouse gas emissions, recycling, locations and standards, costs, and player opinions, Oberhausen, Fraunhofer UMSICHT (2021) 146 pages. Technical Report · October 2021 DOI: 10.24406/umsicht-n-640929  https://publica.fraunhofer.de/entities/publication/ddfca00c-9eaa-4663-9148-a907c943524d/details

    • Boyle, Kellie., and Örmeci, Banu., (Sep 2020), Microplastics and Nanoplastics in the Freshwater and Terrestrial Environment: A Review, Water 2020, 12, 2633; doi:10.3390/w12092633 https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/12/9/2633  

    • Carbon Tracker. (2020). The Future’s Not in Plastics: Why Plastics Sector Demand Won’t Rescue the Oil Sector. London, UK: Carbon Tracker. Available at: https://carbontracker.org/reports/the-futures-not-in-plastics/  

    • Cheng, H., Hu, Y.,Reinhard,  M., Environmental and health impacts of artificial turf: A review. (2014) Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 2114–2129 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1021/es4044193  https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es4044193  

    • Clere IK, Ahmmed F, Remoto PIJG, et al. Quantification and characterization of microplastics in commercial fish from southern New Zealand. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 2022 Nov;184:114121. DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.114121. PMID: 36150226. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0025326X22008037 

    • Cumming, John, Infotech Research (Feb 2020)  Final Report: An Environmental Assessment of the Australian Turf Industry with a Lifecycle Assessment, Horticulture Innovation Australia Ltd, Horticulture Australia, https://www.horticulture.com.au/growers/help-your-business-grow/research-reports-publications-fact-sheets-and-more/tu16000/  

    • DELWP website - Cooling and Greening Melbourne Interactive Map (Page last updated: 12/03/21) https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/policy-and-strategy/planning-for-melbourne/plan-melbourne/cooling-greening-melbourne/cooling-and-greening-melbourne-interactive-map  

    • Englart, John (November 2020), Taking the temperature of Moreland Playgrounds and surfaces, Climate Action Moreland, 24 November, 2020, https://climateactionmoreland.org/2020/11/24/taking-the-temperature-of-moreland-playgrounds-and-surfaces/   

    • Eunomia Research & Consulting Ltd for FIFA, (March 2017), Environmental Impact Study on Artificial Football Turf, https://football-technology.fifa.com/en/media-tiles/environmental-impact-study-on-artificial-football-turf/  

    • Gomes, F.O., Rocha, M.R., Alves, A., Ratola, N. (2021), A review of potentially harmful chemicals in crumb rubber used in synthetic football pitches, Journal of Hazardous Materials Volume 409, 5 May 2021, 124998. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304389420329897  

    • Jang, Min., Hyemin Yang, Seul-A Park, Hye Kyeong Sung, Jun Mo Koo, Sung Yeon Hwang, Hyeonyeol Jeon, Dongyeop X. Oh, Jeyoung Park, Analysis of volatile organic compounds produced during incineration of non-degradable and biodegradable plastics (Sep 2022), Chemosphere, Volume 303, Part 1, 2022, 134946, ISSN 0045-6535, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.134946 

    • Kanaan, Ahmed, Sevostianova, Elena, Leinauer, Bernd and Sevostianov, Igor (August 2020), Water Requirements for Cooling Artificial Turf, in Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering,  August 2020 DOI link:  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0001506  

    • Lauria, Mélanie Z., Ayman Naim, Merle Plassmann, Jenny Fäldt, Roxana Sühring, and Jonathan P. Benskin, Widespread Occurrence of Non-Extractable Fluorine in Artificial Turfs from Stockholm, Sweden.  Environmental Science & Technology Letters 2022 9 (8), 666-672 DOI: 10.1021/acs.estlett.2c00260 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.estlett.2c00260  

    • Leslie, Heather A., Martin J.M. van Velzen, Sicco H. Brandsma, A. Dick Vethaak, Juan J. Garcia-Vallejo, Marja H. Lamoree, (2022) Discovery and quantification of plastic particle pollution in human blood, Environment International, Volume 163, 2022, 107199, ISSN 0160-4120, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2022.107199. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412022001258 

    • Loveday, Jane; Loveday, Grant; Byrne, Joshua J.; Ong, Boon-lay; Morrison, Gregory M. (2019), "Seasonal and Diurnal Surface Temperatures of Urban Landscape Elements" Sustainability 11, no. 19: 5280. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11195280  

    • Lu, Ji., Zhigang Yu, Lyman Ngiam, Jianhua Guo, (2022) Microplastics as potential carriers of viruses could prolong virus survival and infectivity, Water Research, Volume 225, 2022, 119115, ISSN 0043-1354, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2022.119115. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0043135422010612 

    • Mack CD, Hershman EB, Anderson RB, Coughlin MJ, McNitt AS, Sendor RR, Kent RW. (2019) Higher Rates of Lower Extremity Injury on Synthetic Turf Compared With Natural Turf Among National Football League Athletes: Epidemiologic Confirmation of a Biomechanical Hypothesis. Am J Sports Med. 2019 Jan;47(1):189-196. doi: 10.1177/0363546518808499. Epub 2018 Nov 19. PMID: 30452873. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0363546518808499 

    • McNitt, A.S., D.M. Petrunak and T.J. Serensits. (2008). Temperature amelioration of synthetic turf surfaces through irrigation. Acta Hort. 783:573-582 .https://plantscience.psu.edu/research/centers/ssrc/documents/temperature-irrigation.pdf  

    • Meil, J., and L. Bushi, “Estimating the required global warming offsets to achieve a carbon neutral synthetic field Turf system installation: Athena Institute.” (2006). http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.562.9393  

    • Persson, Linn.,Bethanie M. Carney Almroth, Christopher D. Collins, Sarah Cornell, Cynthia A. de Wit, Miriam L. Diamond, Peter Fantke, Martin Hassellöv, Matthew MacLeod, Morten W. Ryberg, Peter Søgaard Jørgensen, Patricia Villarrubia-Gómez, Zhanyun Wang, and Michael Zwicky Hauschild (Jan 2022) Outside the Safe Operating Space of the Planetary Boundary for Novel Entities. Environmental Science & Technology 2022 56 (3), 1510-1521 DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.1c04158 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.1c04158 

    • Pfautsch, Sebastian., Agnieszka Wujeska-Klause, Judi Walters, Outdoor playgrounds and climate change: Importance of surface materials and shade to extend play time and prevent burn injuries, Building and Environment, Volume 223, 2022, 109500, ISSN 0360-1323, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2022.109500. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360132322007314  )

    • Senathirajah, Kala., Simon Attwood, Geetika Bhagwat, Maddison Carbery, Scott Wilson, Thava Palanisami, Estimation of the mass of microplastics ingested – A pivotal first step towards human health risk assessment, Journal of Hazardous Materials, Volume 404, Part B, 2021, 124004, ISSN 0304-3894, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.124004. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304389420319944  )

    • Siebentritt, Mark, Seed Consulting Services (May 2020) Final Report: Conveying the benefits of living turf ‐ Mitigation of the urban heat island effect, Horticulture Innovation Australia Ltd, Horticulture Australia, https://www.horticulture.com.au/growers/help-your-business-grow/research-reports-publications-fact-sheets-and-more/tu18000/  

    • Sun C, Hurley J, Amati M, Arundel J, Saunders A, Boruff B, Caccetta P (2019) Urban Vegetation, Urban Heat Islands and Heat Vulnerability Assessment in Melbourne, 2018. Clean Air and Urban Landscapes Hub, Melbourne, Australia https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/440181/UHI-and-HVI2018_Report_v1.pdf  

    • Van Kleunen, Mark., Brumer, Anna., Gutbrod, Lisa., Zhang,  Zhijie., (2020) A microplastic used as infill material in artificial sport turfs reduces plant growth., PLANTS, PEOPLE, PLANET DOI: 10.1002/ppp3.10071  https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ppp3.10071  

    • Xu, E.G., Lin, N., Cheong, R.S., (...), Larsson, H.C.E., Tufenkji, N. (2019) Artificial turf infill associated with systematic toxicity in an amniote vertebrate, PNAS December 10, 2019 116 (50) 25156-25161; first published November 25, 2019; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1909886116  

    • Yaghoobian, N., Jan Kleissl, E. Scott Krayenhoff (2010) Modelling the Thermal Effects of Artificial Turf on the Urban Environment. Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology. Vol 49 332-345 http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2009JAMC2198.1 

    • Yang, Zhan.,  Fan Lü, Hua Zhang, Wei Wang, Liming Shao, Jianfeng Ye, Pinjing He, Is incineration the terminator of plastics and microplastics?, (Jan 2021) Journal of Hazardous Materials, Volume 401, 2021, 123429, ISSN 0304-3894, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.123429 . 

Addendum to Submission

I would like to make an addition to my original submission dated 22 March 2023 on the J H Allan Reserve upgrade and in particular, the proposal to convert a natural turf sports field to a synthetic field. 

My addendum is based on new information on long term health effects from airborne microplastics pollution..

Prevention of another source for airborne microplastics pollution provides further reason that Installation of synthetic turf surfaces should be avoided as part of the precautionary principle.

Health Impacts from airborne microplastics 

The Centre for International Environment Law (CIEL) published a briefing note dated 27 March 2023 on Breathing Plastic: The Health Impacts of Invisible Plastics in the Air (March 2023). https://www.ciel.org/reports/airborne-microplastics-briefing/ 

While this review of airborne microplastics does not specifically mention synthetic turf as a source, we know from the scientific studies that I detailed in Appendix 1 of my original submission that some 50 kilograms to over 1 metric ton of fibre loss per year from an average soccer field - contributing to microplastics pollution.  (Bertling et al Oct 2021) .

The CIEL report says;

“the amount of atmospheric micro- and nanoplastics in an individual’s vicinity — can be as high as 5,700 microplastics per cubic meter.  It’s estimated that humans can inhale up to 22,000,000 micro- and nanoplastics annually.”

Microplastic particles “can enter the respiratory system through the nose or mouth before being deposited in the upper airways or deep in the lungs. Once there, evidence shows that micro- and nanoplastics can be transferred from the lung epithelial surface to lung tissue, potentially to internal organs and the vascular system, and beyond.”

“The very characteristics of microplastics reveal their potential to be a dangerously potent vector for toxics and pathogens. Microplastics often have large specific surface areas and are predominantly hydrophobic, meaning they repel water. These characteristics make airborne microplastics a “Trojan Horse” capable of hiding and carrying harmful substances inside the animals or humans who inhale, absorb, and ingest them. Therefore, knowing what’s inside plastic is as important as knowing what lies on it.”

The CIEL report highlights the Health Impacts from accumulation of microplastics as:

“ While airborne microplastics research is in its infancy, studies on the inhalation of micro- and nanoparticles of plastics show a series of adverse effects along the respiratory tract and beyond, ranging from irritation to the onset of cancer in cases of chronic exposure.

These adverse effects include:

• immediate asthma-like reactions;

• inflammatory reactions and fibrotic changes, like chronic bronchitis;

• lung disorders such as extrinsic allergic alveolitis and chronic pneumonia;

• pulmonary emphysema;

• the development of interstitial lung diseases, resulting in coughing, difficulty breathing, and a reduction in lung capacity; 

• oxidative stress and the formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and thus the ability to damage cells (cytotoxic effects); and

• autoimmune diseases.”

It is important to consider here the cumulative impact of microplastics from multiple sources in the environment. Synthetic Turf adds one substantial source of airborne microplastics, that will likely also contain a toxic cocktail of other chemicals.

Other Research

Several other recent studies identify synthetic turf as a source for airborne microplastics. See specifically: Mehmood, Tariq., Licheng Peng, (May 2022) Polyethylene scaffold net and synthetic grass fragmentation: a source of microplastics in the atmosphere?. 

A Literature review by Aini, Sofi Azilan., Achmad Syafiuddin, Grace-Anne Bent, (2022) The presence of microplastics in air environment and their potential impacts on health, found 16 studies on airborne microplastics some of which reference synthetic turf as a source.

Airborne microplastics from a synthetic turf field would be inhaled by people using the surface or by people in the surrounding area. This would contribute to cumulative exposure of microplastics influencing long term health outcomes. 

On these airborne microplastic particles from Synthetic turf could be anti-bacterial agents, disinfectants, micro-particles of any toxic agents used in the synthetic turf and turf infill. 

Research shows that airborne microplastics particles can act as a vector for toxic chemicals and viruses. 

Senathirajah et al 2021 estimated that between 0.1–5 g of microplastics per week are already ingested by each human on average from all sources. Adding a synthetic turf sports field adds another local exposure source to airborne microplastics that can be inhaled.

Polyethylene (commonly used for synthetic turf fibres) is one of the substances detected as nanoplastics in human blood. (Leslie et al March 2022). Boyle et al (Sep 2020) found that microplastics <75 μm are very capable of accumulating within the human body. “These early findings suggest that there is a potential threat to human health.” 

Airborne microplastics particles from synthetic turf fibres are likely to contain fluorine, a signature chemical indicating presence of PFAS “forever chemicals” which bioaccumulates in living organisms. There is 0.315–17.439 kg of Fluorine per field (Lauria et al 2022). 

Conclusion

Airbone microplastics pollution derived from synthetic turf likely contributes to cumulative exposure adding to human health issues, which may take years to decades to eventuate. 

Prevention of another source for airborne microplastics pollution provides further reason that Installation of synthetic turf surfaces should be avoided as part of the precautionary principle.

John Englart

References:

Mehmood, Tariq., Licheng Peng, (May 2022) Polyethylene scaffold net and synthetic grass fragmentation: a source of microplastics in the atmosphere?, Journal of Hazardous Materials, Volume 429, 2022, 128391, ISSN 0304-3894, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.128391. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304389422001790 )

Comment: One of the sources for airborne polyethylene microplastics may be synthetic turf pitches and scaffold netting, argues this Chinese based research. Synthetic turf is commonly polyethylene fibres. These may become airborne as they breakdown through weathering Study behind a paywall, abstract only available.

Aini, Sofi Azilan., Achmad Syafiuddin, Grace-Anne Bent, (2022) The presence of microplastics in air environment and their potential impacts on health, Environmental and Toxicology Management 2 (2022) 31-39 https://103.106.72.77/index.php/ETM/article/download/2900/1663 

Comment: Indonesian Literature review on microplastics in the air. Lists artificial turf as one of the sources for generating airborne microplastics, summarises previous studies of airborne microplastics.