Cities Facing Turf Questions

4 September 2009 - 5:00am

Water saver or environmental hazard? Questions are compounding about artificial turf as more homeowners ditch their grass for fake lawns. Contradicting city policies muddy the issue in the arid Southwest.

Planetizen Assistant Editor Nate Berg reports on how some cities are responding to increased demand for artificial turf -- both as a water-saving device and an easier way to keep up green appearances.

"As Garden Grove is allowing it, however, other Southwest municipalities are finding reasons to say no to faux. Glendale, Ariz., had once given rebates to residents for installing artificial turf as a water-saving alternative. The savings turned out to be modest and conversions ended up causing environmental problems. The city stopped giving rebates after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released an advisory in June 2008 associating artificial turf with a potential exposure to lead dust, created as the fibers making up some phony grass blades age and wear."

Full Story: Faux Better or Worse
Source: Miller-McCune, August 27, 2009
Bookmark and Share
As an alternative to burial, cremation is no longer green enough, say some environmentalists, because it releases smoke and mercury into the atmosphere.