Matthew Vegari ’13
We run across the beautifully colored fields with tiny pieces of rubber kicking up behind us, enjoying the ease of running across a perfectly flat surface, while also remaining unaware of the potential dangers that arise from artificial turf.
Though they look perfectly green and inviting, there are certain risks that are heightened by the use of turf fields, including heat stroke, infection, and the emission of harmful fumes. Episcopal currently houses two turf fields for football and field hockey, as well as a turf playground in the Lower School.
If it does not rain for several days, the blood, sweat, and tears that have fallen on the turf field stay there, as the turf fields are not watered by our sprinkler system, which would cleanse the field. Studies have shown an elevated risk of MRSA infections in turf fields as a result of the lack of water to remove bacteria that has been baking in the sun. The burns that result from impact to the ground allow the skin to pick up more bacteria than it would from a grass field, where burns are less frequent.
As a result of the plastic and crumb rubber (ground up used tires) that make up the surface, turf fields become significantly hotter than grass fields, and in many cases increase risk of heat stroke. The temperature difference between natural grass and synthetic turf on a hot day can be upwards of 50 degrees. To lessen the presence of heat, colleges and major sports teams water the fields down immediately before use. Unfortunately, the fields heat up again within thirty minutes and the cool-down proves only temporary.
The heat that is produced also causes fumes to enter the air from the heated surface, but Regina Buggy, Episcopal’s Athletic Director, told Scholium that the turf that Episcopal installed was purchased carefully as to ensure student safety. Episcopal installed turf from the company FieldTurf, a company endorsed by the NFL.
EA alumnus Jimmy Shananhan ’90, who works at FieldTurf, asserted once again that studies have been performed to prove turf’s safety, stating, “we’ve looked into it and we have the research.” However, it seems that there has been as much effort to promote turf as there has to denounce it.
The main advantage of turf fields is the many economic benefits of having very low maintenance fees. There is no money spent on watering, grooming, fertilizing, or planting seeds. The fields are also much more durable, so teams can practice on the turf fields when the other fields are too wet to use.
With consistent use of turf fields, the rubber and plastic follicles that make up the surface begin to break down to form a dust. In recent years, concerns have begun to arise over the potentially high levels of lead found in this “dust.” A study held three years ago by the New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services (NJDHSS) confirmed the presence of lead in turf fields based on a random study of turf fields in New Jersey. This study provoked other investigations by government organizations that have also noted the seriousness of this problem, resulting in studies denying the presence of lead and others confirming it.
It seems that there is great discrepancy to the information published by organizations. The information provided by FieldTurf was clearly in favor of turf, but there was a good deal of legitimate research involved. Noting this, a common opinion cannot still be formed on the dangers of turf. To be safe, it seems we must treat turf as a more harmful playing field than natural grass and strive to keep our athletes as safe as possible.
Photo found on The Episcopal Academy