No. 19 Concern over synthetic turf is not going away.
No. 18 Toxic Turf [text and video news report].
No. 17 Doctor urges caution on fake turf.
No. 16 Editor's Note: UNEP/Bael Convention and other international legal materials.
No. 15 Italy: Syntehtic turf fields will be cleaned up!
No. 14 Recyclers used to burining rubber are now idling.
No. 13 Used Tires Killed Reef.
No. 12 Editorial Note: On Toxcity of Rubber Crumb.
No. 11 Rubber infill from used tires [pictures and text].
No. 10 Tire Dust -- an article from November 2005 issue of Ecologist.
No. 09 Four types of rubber infill [Melos].
No. 08 "Hazardous Chemicals in Synthetic Turf," by William Crain and Junfeng Zhang.
No. 07 Banned in Sweden!
No. 06 "Synthetic turf from a chemical perspective, a status report," by the Swedish Chemicals Inspectorate (March 2006): Background, Summary, Conclusions, Recommendations. No. 05 "Potential health and environmental effects linked to artificial turf systems - final report," by Norwegian Building Research Institute (September 2004). No. 04 "Myth of Rubberized Landscapes" by by Linda Chalker-Scott, Ph.D. No. 03 "Environmental impact of highway construction and repair materials on surface and ground waters. Case study: crumb rubber asphalt concrete," by M.F. Azizian, P.O. Nelson, P. Thayumanavan and K.J. Williamson.
No. 02 A Colorado Study.
No. 01 From the Horse's Mouth: Ten cate Thiolon Product Advisory.
No. 00 Hazardous waste [pictorial].
[No. 35]Nanoparticles of carbon blackand othersubstances of concern in crumb rubber. SynTurf.org, Newton, Mass. 12 October 20124. In 2009, Jim Novak of Turfgrass Producers International published an article entitled “Exposure to crumb rubber nanoparticles could lead to serious health issues.” In the same year, the article appeared in Turf & Recreation, a national publication serving the Canadian turf and grounds maintenance industry (http://www.turfandrec.com/). The following is the verbatim republication of that piece as it appeared in Turf & Recreation at http://www.turfandrec.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2986(2009).
I’M not a big fan of articles that pose a lot of questions and offer few, if any, answers. Listening to conspiracy theories, hearing “what if” scenarios, or reading articles that make unfounded claims and present mere speculation often do little more than ruffle the feathers of a few people and enrage others.
The debate over the health safety of synthetic turf fields has gone back and forth for years. Concerns about toxic metals, silica sand, staph infections, dangerously high surface temperatures, proper methods of disposal, etc., are just a few of the significant issues that have come under scrutiny.
However, there are times when information comes to light that requires broader attention. Such is the case with a growing concern expressed by many health care professionals and research scientists regarding the possible health consequences of carbon black nanoparticles present in tires that make up tire crumb; the most common infill used on artificial turf fields.
Nanoparticles are particles less than 100 nanometres in diameter. A nanometer is a billionth of a metre, about the size of six carbon atoms in a row.
For comparison, a human hair is about 80,000 nanometres wide and a strand of DNA is two nanometres wide. To visualize it another way, a nanometre is to one inch as one inch is to 400 miles.
Whether you are for or against artificial turf, this subject is important; especially if you have children who play on artificial turf fields or visit playgrounds that use tire crumb for cushioning; or if you are a student or professional athlete who plays football, soccer, rugby, lacrosse or baseball on fields that use tire crumb as an infill.
The concern: Carbon black nanoparticles make up 30 per cent or more of car tires; the same tires that are pulverized for creating the tire crumb used on artificial turf playing fields and on playgrounds for children. Engineered carbon nanotubes and other engineered nanoparticles (zinc, titanium, etc.) are often made in specific shapes to give added strength and durability to tires and other goods. It is the long thin nature of engineered carbon nanotubes that has some scientists drawing a comparison between the possible health hazards of tire crumb with asbestos.
How do carbon nanotubes affect lung tissue?
The study Greenemier referenced was posted by Nature Nanotechnology led by the Queen’s Medical Research Institute at the University of Edinburg/MRC Center for Inflammation Research in Scotland. Their research showed that long, needle-thin carbon nanotubes could lead to lung cancer and inhaling carbon nanotubes could be as harmful as breathing asbestos.
A carbon nanotube is a carbon molecule that resembles a cylinder made out of chicken wire that is one to two nanometres in diameter by any number of millimetres in length. Nanotubes have a tensile strength 10 times greater than steel and they are considered the strongest material for their weight known to mankind. It should be noted that carbon black is a natural although manufactured material made up of carbon nanoparticles; carbon nanotubes are created/engineered by scientists and are much rarer although apparently highly toxic at low concentrations.
The study suggested that inhaling carbon nanotubes could lead to the same cancer and breathing problems that prompted a ban on asbestos as insulation in buildings.
The research scientists observed that long, thin carbon nanotubes look and behave like asbestos fibres, which have been shown to cause mesothelioma, a deadly cancer of the membrane lining the body’s internal organs (particularly the lungs) and can take 30 to 40 years to appear following exposure.
Asbestos fibres are especially harmful, because they are small enough to penetrate deep into the lungs yet too long for the body’s immune system to destroy. Just how small are carbon nanotubes? They are no thicker than an atom, or one billionth of a metre wide, or approximately 10,000 times smaller than a human hair.
Andrew Maynard, the study’s co-author and chief science adviser for the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholar’s Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies based in Washington, D.C., has been researching and warning of the potential health and environmental risks of carbon nanotubes since 2003 and is quoted as saying there had been no coordinated effort to date to analyze the findings of carbon nanotube toxicity studies.
Since the initial release of the MRC study other researchers have expressed their concerns as well. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) reported their research methods demonstrate that breathing nanoparticles may result in damaging health effects.
NIOSH scientists invented a way to suspend nanotubes in the air so the concentration of particles could be carefully controlled. Mice were placed into a carefully-controlled environment where they could breathe the air containing the particles. Scientists studied the effects of exposure after one, seven, and 28 days. The research showed that carbon nanotubes were more potent when inhaled than when aspirated. In addition, the research showed early indications of serious health outcomes that may have longer term effects such as cancer, and therefore, ongoing research is important to more clearly understand the implications of exposure to carbon nanotubes.
In May 2008, Nature Nanotechnology reported a similar finding, “Carbon nanotubes introduced into the abdominal cavity of mice show asbestos-like pathogenicity in a pilot study.”
The study reported, “Carbon nanotubes have distinctive characteristics, but their needle-like fibre shape has been compared to asbestos, raising concerns that widespread use of carbon nanotubes may lead to mesothelioma, a cancer of the lining of the lungs similar to that caused by exposure to asbestos.
“Exposing the mesothelial lining of the body cavity of mice, as a surrogate for the mesothelial lining of the chest cavity, to long multi-walled carbon nanotubes results in asbestos-like, length-dependent, pathogenic behaviour. This includes inflammation and the formation of lesions known as granulomas. This is of considerable importance, because research and business communities continue to invest heavily in carbon nanotubes for a wide range of products under the assumption that they are no more hazardous than graphite. Our results suggest the need for further research and great caution before introducing such products into the market if long-term harm is to be avoided.”
How do carbon black nanoparticles get to brain tissue?
Peter Gehr, a professor of histology (the study of tissue) and anatomy at the University of Bern in Switzerland, stated that synthetic nanoparticles can penetrate tissue and cells, and spread throughout the body—even to the brain.
Gehr is astonished that potential health risks of synthetic nanoparticles are barely acknowledged outside the scientific world and government agencies. “If nanoparticles are not solidly bound to another material, there is a risk that we could inhale them. They can enter the bloodstream and spread throughout the entire body. The mere fact that particles penetrate into the body is a problem.”
Carbon black nanoparticles: what about the children?
Environment and Human Health, Inc. has asked the following questions about nanoparticles in the tire crumb infill used as mulch for playgrounds used by children:
1. How does the knowledge that carbon black nanoparticles are added to rubber tires affect the risk assessments done on synthetic turf and the rubber mulch used in toddlers’ playgrounds?
2. Because none of the risk assessments done up to the present time on rubber tire crumbs or playground mulch have taken into consideration the fact that carbon black nanoparticles have been added to rubber tires—how does this fact affect the claim by some jurisdictions that rubber tire crumbs and rubber tire playground mulch are safe for children to play on?
3. As children play on synthetic turf fields and playground mulch, dust develops. Are nanoparticles in the dust? If so, are they capable of being aspirated into the children’s lungs? Who is researching this? Rubber tires are designed for cars and trucks; they were never designed for grinding up and putting where children play. How does this fact affect some jurisdictions’ approvals for putting used tire crumb where children play?
4. Could this be another example of a toxic material getting out into the environment without enough testing?
Perhaps neuroscientist, Dr. Kathleen Michels summarized it best: “Carbon black is the proverbial 800-pound gorilla in the room that no one wants to talk about, or take notice of, but it has the potential to wreck everything in its path. First, It has been declared a possible carcinogen by the U.S. government and by the World Health Organization. Then, carbon black used in tires consists of the purest, smallest (ultrafine) nanoparticles, giving them a unique potential toxicity throughout the body.
“Normally this might not be a problem for any individual, since most of the carbon black is trapped inside a tire. However, when you pulverize tires for use in children’s playing fields, whether done at ambient or cold temperatures, everything in them (including carbon black particles) becomes more available to interact with the environment and people since the surface area to volume increases exponentially as you go from whole tire, to pulverized tire granule to the dust that becomes airborne with weathering and the impact of each child’s footfall and body. Finally, the sheer concentrated volume of this pulverized carbon black material should get serious attention: tires are 30 per cent or more carbon black so a 200-ton tire crumb-laden sports field contains around 60 tons of carbon black—an unprecedented exposure that deserves serious attention and research.
“But carbon black is not the only nanoparticle containing component of tires. Engineered nanoparticles such as carbon nanotubes, which may have asbestos-like toxicity, are also being added to tires. But how much and to which tires is difficult to determine. Which highlights a main problem with tire crumb: the recipe of any company’s tires is proprietary so we never know exactly what the ingredients are for any individual tire much less a bag of tire crumb (and even less the 30,000 or so tires in a sports field!).
“Some schools which have tire crumb on fields or playgrounds close to their classrooms report a fine grey dust on school surfaces inside when windows are open. Most artificial turf fields with tire crumb are still relatively young. There is no evidence yet of long-term harm from this unprecedented, often chronic, exposure of children to carbon black or other tire components from playing on tire crumb; but then again there are no studies on children exposed chronically to tire crumb over time. But there are worrying studies on exposure to carbon black particles in the air. Shouldn’t we be asking the questions and following up on the exposed children with research?”
Important: There are different types of nanoparticles made of different building blocks, and each type of nanoparticle can be unique in its actions and effects, and act differently in engineered products as well as in the body.
It is true that frequent exposure to nanoparticles from many consumer products means some nanoparticles are getting into us.
It is also true that cell studies suggest that some types of nanoparticles can damage the DNA or cause cell death in different parts of the body, such as the brain, the lungs or blood vessels.
The term “nanoparticle” is not intended to apply to all nanoparticles but, in this case, carbon black nanoparticles.
“People either have no idea about nanoparticles or do not regard them as a problem,” said Dr. Peter Gehr, professor of histology and anatomy at the University of Bern.
“The potential risks are also of little interest at the political level. People are simply not reacting to the possible harmful aspects of synthetic nanoparticles right now. The mere fact that particles penetrate into the body is a problem, but this is barely acknowledged outside the realms of science and government agencies.”
The aforementioned comments were based on research reports and articles from numerous health care organizations, research scientists, health care professionals and nanotechnology experts who represent a wide variety of non-biased and reputable sources. Because the subject matter is likely to stir interest and create some controversy, we have provided a partial list of numerous reference materials so readers can reach their own conclusion.
• “Study Says Carbon Nanotubes as Dangerous as Asbestos.” New research shows long, needle-thin carbon nanotubes could lead to lung cancer.
• “As Nanotech's Promise Grows, Will Puny Particles Present Big Health Problems?” Amid the great promise nanotechnology offers, big questions remain on health dangers posed by exposure to tissue-penetrating particles.
• “YouTube VIDEO — ‘Toxic Chemicals: The Safety of Synthetic Fields and How Environmental Laws are Failing Our Children’” — 9:40 into nanoparticles. Speaker: Dr. Joel Forman, associate professor of pediatrics and community and preventive medicine, Mt. Sinai School of Medicine and other researchers offer their latest findings on the potential health and environmental risks associated with crumb rubber in-fill used on synthetic turf fields. Panel: Dr. Susan Buchanan, clinical assistant professor, environmental and occupational health sciences, University of Illinois Chicago; Dr. Helen Binns, professor in pediatrics and preventive medicine, Children Memorial Hospital Chicago; and Carolyn Raffensperger, environmental lawyer and executive director of science and environmental health network.
• “Induction of Inflammasome-dependent Pyroptosis by Carbon Black Nanoparticles.” The Journal of Biological Chemistry
• “Nanoparticles can penetrate brain tissue.” Interview with Dr. Peter Gehr, professor of histology (the study of tissue) and anatomy at the University of Bern in Switzerland by the Federal Office for the Environment (the Swiss federal government’s centre of environmental expertise). Dr. Gehr is internationally renowned as a researcher and for his studies on the behaviour of nanoparticles in the lungs and on their interaction with cells.
According to news item in The Alamanc (16 Juen 2014), on 12 June 2014, McNitt, addressing more than 30 residents of Mt. Lebanon, Pennsylvania, on the improvements to the fields at the municipality’s Main Park, stated “that natural turf can get muddy and only take one event before it needs to be groomed…. [R]esearch shows that most high school fields need to be renovated after 80 events per year. He said with artificial turf fields, the negatives are the cost, injury potential, heat and chemicals used in the turf…He added that with artificial turf, the crumb rubber or other type of infill needs to be replaced or ‘top dressed’ on a regular basis. He said between 6,000 and 7,000 pounds of crumb rubber can come out of a field each year. With organic infill, some type of shock absorption pad would need to be used, which can run about $50,000….While McNitt is not a toxicologist, but a soil scientist, he said there are chemicals in artificial turf. They include alcohols, acids, ketones, esters, lactones and sulfur among others.” “The meeting was recorded and is available for view online at www.mtlebanon.org, and on Mt.Lebanon’s cable channels 17 and 34.” Source:“Mt.Lebanon invites experts to talk turf,” in The Almanac, 16 June 2014, at http://www.thealmanac.net/article/20140616/NEWS/140619956 (pdf).
SynTurf.org Note: Where do the 6,000 and 7,000 pounds of crumb rubber migrate to? The environment; players’ clothes, eyes, mouth, stomach, shoes, cars; and the garbage can, and down the drain. Those that end up in the garbage can go to landfill that probably would not accept whole tires. Those that end up in the sewer end up in the municipal water and sewer treatment facilities. Now think of the same problem along the following lines: number of installed fields in the geographical region x 6,000-7,000 lbs of crumb rubber=y; y divided by number of average automobile tires that renders one pound ofcrumb rubber=z. Z is the number of tires that migrated off the field in one year.
[No. 33] Before using pulverized styrene butadiene, consider this. Kelley Watts of SFPARKS – SHPFC, San Francisco, California, recently fired a letter to the California Coastal Commission Staff, challenging the revised finding of the Commission’s 9 May 2013 approval of coastal permit with conditions to renovate existing Beach Chalet athletic fields in Golden Gate Park. Kelley’s area of concern is that the Revised Finding is not in conformance with the Local Coastal Program (LCP) in that it allows the project to introduce over 400 tons of loose uncovered toxic styrene butadiene particles into the coastal zone.
The following is an expert of that challenge whose substance, in our opinion should a standard wrap-sheet on crumb rubber for distribution to policymakers and members of the public when the question of artificial turf arises in our communities.
BASIS OF CONCERN
What is styrene butadiene? Styrene butadiene, (sometimes called styrene butadiene rubber or SBR) is derived from tires. You may have seen it in particulate form fly up when athletes play in it on a synthetic field or perhaps when shaken out of children's hair and clothes. Hundreds of under-regulated chemicals and metals constitute a tire, including lead, PAHs, and carbon black. Over 20% of a tire's chemical makeup is listed as causing cancer by the State of California's Office of Environmental and Health Hazard Assessment, OEHHA, based on the findings of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).
How much styrene butadiene particulate material will be used in the project? According to the leading supplier of San Francisco's styrene butadiene synthetic fields, one single football sized installation contains over 35,000 pulverized tires. If you stacked 35,000 tires side by side as we commonly see them done attire dealers then the stack would reach 3.86 miles high, (or 16 Empire State buildings). The total amount of tire material used in the 7 acre Beach Chalet conversion project would create a stack well over 7 times more, (well over 25 miles high).
How exposed will the styrene butadiene particulates be to the coastal environment? Contrary to a common misconception, the styrene butadiene particles will not be covered by a plastic layer but will instead be on top of a plastic "carpet" sitting loose among the blades. The fact that one can hardly see the particles on a synthetic field illustrates how ultra-finely pulverized the tire particulates will be. The particles are barely visible on a plastic “carpet” with a 1.75 inch blade height. The particles' small size creates a migratory inevitability throughout the coastal zone environment.
The following YouTube video clips illustrate styrene butadiene environmental impacts: (1) A compilation of news clips and accounts with a Bay Area presence. It contains multiple San Francisco and Bay Area synthetic turf installations with styrene butadiene infill. “YouTube Synthetic Turf Particles – SFPARKS” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2USPTy_wVM ; (2) A compilation of statements from medical doctors, pediatricians, and toxicologists addressing the potential health risks of exposure from styrene butadiene to children and pregnant women. “YouTube Children & Synthetic Turf – SFPARKS” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3sg2BNlLfU
[No. 32] Study: Risk of ingesting lead increases as size of crumb rubber gets smaller. According to an analysis by scientists from the Institute for Environmental Research at YonseiUniversity and Department of Preventive Medicine at Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea, the exposure of lead ingestion and risk level increases as the particle size of crumb rubber gets smaller. The study looked at the ingestion exposure by particle sizes (more than 250 um or less than 250 um) of recycled ethylene propylene diene monomer crumb rubber that is used as infill in artificial turf. The analysis on crumb rubber was conducted using body ingestion exposure estimate method. Two methods using acid extraction and digestion extraction concentration were compared and evaluated.
As a result of the ingestion exposure of crumb rubber material, the average lead exposure amount to the digestion extraction result among crumb rubber was calculated to be 1.56×10-4 mg/kg-day for low grade elementary school students and 4.87×10-5 mg/kg-day for middle and high school students in 250 um or less particle size, and that to the acid extraction result was higher than the digestion extraction result. Results of digestion extraction and acid extraction showed that the hazard quotient was estimated by about over 2 times more in particle size of lower than 250 um than in higher than 250 um. There was a case of an elementary school student in which the hazard quotient exceeded 0.1.
The study is entitled Health Risk Assessment of Lead Ingestion Exposure by Particle Sizes in Crumb Rubber on Artificial Turf Considering Bioavailability by Sunduk Kim, Ji-Yeon Yang, Ho-Hyun Kim, In-Young Yeo, Dong-Chun Shin, and Young-Wook Lim. The study was published in Environmental Health and Toxicology 2012), published online 2 February 2012. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3278598/ .
[No. 31] Spanish research confirms existence of dangerous chemicals in crumb rubber and other used-tire products. The study analyzed a large number of recycled tire playgrounds and commercial pavers. It confirmed the occurrence of numerous harmful compounds at high levels among thirty-one selected targets (PAHs, vulcanisation additives, antioxidants, plasticizers). It found that the total PAH concentration was remarkable. The study called attention to presence of B[a]P and noted that analytes were detected in the headspace SPME experiments at room temperature. The following is an abstract of Maria Llomparta, Lucia Sanchez-Pradoa, J. Pablo Lamasa, Carmen Garcia-Jaresa, Enrique Rocab and Thierry Dagnacc, “Hazardous organic chemicals in rubber recycled tire playgrounds and pavers,” an original paper from a multi-departmental investigators at the Universidad de Santiago de Compostela in Santiago de Compostela, Spain, published on 22 August 2012 on line http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.07.053 and made available at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045653512009848 :
In this study, the presence of hazardous organic chemicals in surfaces containing recycled rubber tires is investigated. Direct material analyses using solvent extraction, as well as SPME analysis of the vapour phase above the sample, were carried out. Twenty-one rubber mulch samples were collected from nine different playgrounds. In addition, seven commercial samples of recycled rubber pavers were acquired in a local store of a multinational company. All samples were extracted by ultrasound energy, followed by analysis of the extract by GC–MS. The analysis confirmed the presence of a large number of hazardous substances including PAHs, phthalates, antioxidants (e.g. BHT, phenols), benzothiazole and derivatives, among other chemicals. The study evidences the high content of toxic chemicals in these recycled materials. The concentration of PAHs in the commercial pavers was extremely high, reaching values up to 1%. In addition, SPME studies of the vapour phase above the samples confirm the volatilisation of many of those organic compounds. Uses of recycled rubber tires, especially those targeting play areas and other facilities for children, should be a matter of regulatory concern.
[No. 30] Dr. David Brown, toxicologist, discusses crumb rubber in artificial turf fields. A video presentation, entitled: Artificial Turf: A troubling Perspective (September 2012) on Vimeo.com at https://vimeo.com/49518944 (from Amy Stephan). Dr. Brown is a public health toxicologist and serves as the Director of Public Health Toxicology at Environment and Human Health, Inc. (www.ehhi.org), a non-profit in North Haven, Connecticut.
[No. 29] Carbon black nanoparticle in crumb rubber raises further concern about artificial turf fields. In a press release,dated August 10, 2010, the Fraunhofer Institute for Toxicology and ExperimentalMedicine, in Germany,announced that it is participating in a research alliance on the health risks of carbon black. According to the press release, “Carbon black is an industrial chemical that is manufactured in large quantities worldwide. It consists of smallest nanoparticles and is used, for example, in the manufacturing of automobile tires and other plastic materials. A health risk from carbon black nanoparticles (CBNP) can, as yet, not be ruled out, and the World Health Organization has classified these particles as possibly carcinogenic.” For a copy of the press release click here.
According to the press release, “The aim of the scientists in the carbon black research alliance is to eventually find modifications of carbon black nanoparticles that pose no hazard to human health and can thus be commercially exploited without risk.” Until that time however the users of artificial turf fields are condemned to breathing in the carbon black nanoparticles that are found in the crumb rubber made from used tires and any other such carbon black nanoparticles that may reside in the artificial truf field's plastic blades.
These concerns have been noted recently by Environment and Human Health, Inc. In an e-mail to SynTurf.org, EHHI posited the following:
Just now, understanding that carbon black nanoparticles are in rubber tires, asks the following questions about nanoparticles in rubber tire crumb infill and playground mulch used by children:
(1) How does the knowledge that carbon black nanoparticles are added to rubber tires affect the risk assessments done on synthetic turf and the rubber mulch used in toddlers' playgrounds?
(2) Because none of the risk assessments done up to the present time on rubber tire crumbs or playground mulch have taken into consideration the fact that carbon black nanoparticles have been added to rubber tires --how does this fact affect the claim by some states that rubber tire crumbs and rubber tire playground mulch are safe for children to play on?
(3)As children play on synthetic turf fields and playground mulch - dust develops. Are nanoparticles in the dust? If so, are they capable of being aspirated into the children's lungs?Who is researching this?Rubber tires are designed for cars and trucks - they were never designed for grinding up and putting where children play. How does this fact affect some states approvals for putting used rubber tires where children play?
(4) Could this be another example of a toxic material getting out into the environment without enough testing? Environment and Human Health, Inc. is simply asking these questions - which seem appropriate under the circumstances.
[No. 29] USA Today: New York City and Los AngelesUnifiedSchool District spurn crumb rubber in artificial turf. On June 10, 2009,USA Today carried a news story about New York City and Los AngelesUnifiedSchool District saying “no” to crumb rubber infill. Here is the opening line from the report:“Officials in the nation's two largest cities are not waiting out ongoing studies and debate about the safety of artificial turf fields that use crumbs of recycled tire rubber as a base. The New York City Department of Parks and Recreation and the Los AngelesUnifiedSchool District have decided that any new artificial fields they purchase must use a different material as its base, or infill, layer.” Source: A.J. Perez, “Two cities spurn crumb rubber in artificial turf,” in USA TODAY,
SynTurf.org Note: While alternative infill may well catch on, the turf industry does its level best to discourage it scaring the potential buyer with cost escalations, possible impairment of warranty, absence of widespread performance data, and absence of test results to show their environmental and health benefit like crumb rubber has! SynTurf.org has learned that RiverdaleCountrySchool in Bronx, NY, has just contracted for an artificial turf field that will use an amalgam of coconut and cork for its infill. SynTurf.org has also learned that the same infill is being used in the “dead man zone” of the main stadium at BYU (Provo, Utah), which infill is claimed to be softer to the feet and some 30 degrees cooler than the crumb rubber that was previously used. In the U.S., this infill was first used in connection with a synthetic turf playground in 2008 at International School of Boston, in Cambridge (for the story, seehttp://www.synturf.org/industrynotes.html , Item No. 16)
What is at work in the case of NYC, LAUSD and a smattering of other places is the gradual acceptance of the Precautionary Principle when it comes to the planning and operation of synthetic turf fields, particularly the crumb rubber variety. The Precautionary Principles states: When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically. In this context the proponent of an activity, rather than the public, should bear the burden of proof. The process of applying the precautionary principle must be open, informed and democratic and must include potentially affected parties. It must also involve an examination of the full range of alternatives, including no action.
[No. 28] What’s new is old news: Research professor warns about crumb rubber toxicity. The following is an item form Tire & Rubber Recycling Fax, a bulletin of the Tire Industry Association (TIA), vol. 2, no. 1 (January 13, 2003). Available on the Internet at http://www.tireindustry.org/newsarchives/recycling/recyclyingfax_jan03.asp , the piece reported on the work of one Alison Draper, a research professor at BucknellUniversity, Bucknell, Pennsylvania, who is currently at TrinityCollege in Hartford, CT.
TIA abstract (January 13, 2003):
Preliminary data from a new research study looking into the effects of tire-wear particles on the environment indicates the tire-wear particles may have a negative effect on plant and animal life in aquatic environments. Alison Draper, a research professor at BucknellUniversity, Bucknell, Pennsylvania, has learned that for every kilometer a car travels, about 90 milligrams of tread wears off in particles ranging from 10 microns or less to 75 microns. Draper launched the study with the hope of finding ways to make tires less polluting and to seek answers to the question of where the tread on a car tire goes when it wears off. While Draper has just begun to test the effects of the smallest particles, which remain airborne, her tests appear to show that a toxin or toxins in the larger particles leach out when exposed to water, harming both plant and animal life. Although she has not identified what is responsible for the harmful effects, she said it could be zinc oxide or any of the sulfur-containing agents used in making tires, according to a recent update on the research project.
College Campus News. The TIA abstract no doubt was inspired by the release of an Ascribe Newswire item carrying an item from The College Campus News, a Collegenews.org offering from the Annapolis Group, a nonprofit alliance of the nation’s leading independent liberal arts colleges. Reported from Lewisburg, Pa., on November 19, 2009, the AScribe Newswire’s piece was entitled report, entitled, What Happens to the Rubber That Wears Off a Car's Tires? Bucknell University Chemistry Professor Investigates Environmental, Health Impacts of Tire Wear Particles, available at http://www.collegenews.org/x1939.xml(or click here).
LEWISBURG, Pa., Nov. 19 (AScribe Newswire) -- Alison J. Draper, an assistant professor of chemistry at BucknellUniversity, Lewisburg, Pa., is doing research where the rubber meets the road - literally.
She’s investigating the environmental and health impacts of automobile tire wear particles. As automobile tires move along a road, tiny particles are worn off, and can end up in the air and in nearby waterways. Draper previously did research on diesel exhaust, but says that tire rubber is “much more interesting chemically,” containing heavy metals like zinc and cadmium, hydrocarbons, latex, and sulfur-containing compounds.
Draper's research is not yet complete. But so far her findings include preliminary but solid evidence that tire wear particles may have negative impacts on small organisms in water habitats. Airborne tire particles may also aggravate respiratory problems in human beings (such as asthma or allergies).
Draper’s method has been to make up clean samples of water like those inhabited by several kinds of aquatic organisms - algae, duckweed, daphnia (water fleas), fathead minnows, and snails - and under controlled laboratory conditions, put finely ground tire particles into the samples. By letting the particles remain in the water for 10 days and then filtering them out, she created a “leachate” that included substances in the tire rubber. All the organisms exposed to the leachate died, and the algae died fairly quickly.
Draper is also working on determining the levels of tire rubber chemicals in water that cause sub-lethal effects, such as reproductive problems in the snails and pre-cancerous lesions in the minnows. Draper's work so far has been performed in a lab, under controlled conditions, but she says there’s “good evidence” that tire rubber may have similar effects on similar organisms living in real waterways along real roadways.
An environmental chemist with a doctorate in toxicology (University of Kansas Medical Center, 1996), Draper is also the Clare Boothe Luce Professor of Environmental Chemistry at Bucknell. She says there’s good evidence from the chemistry of tire rubber that it also has the potential to cause asthmatic and/or allergic-type reactions. “We’re only at the very beginning of that investigation. But, given the chemicals in tire rubber and given how readily they leach out, we can expect a respiratory response [in human beings],” she says. “It depends on the levels of the chemicals and the level of exposure - certain people will be more susceptible than others.”
Draper’s research started humbly, with an old tire that came from her father,s 1981 Chevrolet Malibu and was already on the refuse heap. "My father was about to throw it out,” Draper recalls, “and I said, ‘Wait!’” Now she uses tire tread particles supplied by a company in Mississippi, already ground up, and consisting of mixed tire brands.
[No. 27] New York City: Out with the crumb rubber! According to a news report in the Daily News (February 10, 2009), “The controversial material made from recycled tires will no longer be used in synthetic-turf fields for parks and schools, officials said yesterday. While insisting crumb rubber isn't toxic, the officials said they stopped using it because it overheats on hot days and could pose a health risk.” First Deputy Parks Commissioner Liam Kavanagh told a City Council panel [on February 9, 2009] that the City will replace the crumb in all city fields “as part of the normal 10-year renovation cycle.” “Activists and some legislators, however, have called the fields potentially toxic and demanded removal.” “The Council hearing was on several bills to control synthetic fields, including one to impose a six-month moratorium on building new synthetic-turf fields of any kind. The bill's main sponsor, City Councilman Eric Gioia (D-Queens), urged the city to remove all of the controversial material.” “You've got to make sure that you can guarantee every parent in New York City that when their kids are playing on a field, that it is 100 percent safe. If you can't make that guarantee, you’ve got to close that field. It's not a matter of dollars and cents, it's a matter of children’s health,” said Gioia. With the exception of the field at ThomasJeffersonPark, which had tested for high levels of lead, “Department officials say other fields have trace levels of lead, but not enough to cause any harm.” For more on the story, please go to Frank Lombardi, “City yields ground on crumb rubber in turf wars,” in Daily News, February 9, 2009, available at http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/02/09/2009-02-09_city_yields_ground_on_crumb_rubber_in_tu.html ; and NY1 (TV) News, “City Holds Hearing On Synthetic Turf,” http://www.ny1.com/content/top_stories/93623/city-holds-hearing-on-synthetic-turf/Default.aspx
Int 739 - By Council Members Baez, James, Gioia, Mark-Viverito, Gonzalez, Palma and Arroyo - A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to prohibiting the use of certain synthetic turf on surfaces used for recreational purposes.
Int 896 - By Council Members de Blasio, Lappin, Barron, Brewer, Gerson, Gonzalez and James - A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to requiring signage warning of heat dangers of playground mats.
Int 918 - By Council Member Stewart - A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to the surface areas of playgrounds and playing fields.
Res 1782 - By Council Member Mark-Viverito - Resolution calling upon the New York State Legislature to amend Section 399-dd of the General Business Law to allow municipalities to enact local laws regarding playground equipment and the Department of Parks and Recreation to require a temperature test for all equipment installed in parks and playgrounds, including safety surfacing, and to prohibit such materials from being installed that pose a health or burn danger to exposed skin.
[No. 26] NYC says goodbye to crumb rubber infill. SynTurf.org, Newton, Mass. July 6, 2008. Chalk up one for the Herculean effort of the NY Public Advocate Bestsy Gotbaum and a grassroots organization called NYC Park Advocates. By their relentless effort to inform the public and officials of hazards of artificial turf, the NYC Parks Department has decided to discontinue artificial turf fields that use crumb rubber infill. The NY’s first deputy parks commissioner, Liam Kavanagh, has told The Daily News, “the city plans to stop using the crumb-rubber infill because of excessive heat and switch over to a carpet-style turf.” But the paper also reported that it has measured temperatures of 160 degrees Fahrenheit at Macombs Dam Park in the Bronx, which is already a carpet-style turf.
[No. 25]Synthetic Fields: A Question of Ingestion. A video presentation (June 14, 2008). The following link will take you to a YouTube video clip on dynamics of crumb rubber: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zsodulEmz0. The field featured in the video was installed by San Francisco City Field Foundation.
[No. 23] Dr. David Brown, Are Artificial Turf Field Safe? A video-presentation. February 19, 2008. Introduced by Bob McCarthy: Many communities have installed, or considering installing, synthetic turf on athletic fields. Health and environmental questions are being raised about the ground-up used tire "crumbs" used on this turf. Last year, Environment and Human Health, Inc. (EHHI), released an independent report to place health and environmental exposures to recycled tire crumbs in a scientifically based context. David Brown, Sc.D., EHHI's public health toxicologist, prepared the report, which he discussed recently at a meeting in Ridgefield, Connecticut. His presentation was videotaped and is offered here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-876904962403716413&q=synthetic+turf&total=189&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=7.
[No. 22]Trust for Public Land Gets Religion, Says “No” to Crumb Rubber.SynTurf.org, Newton, Mass. February 21, 2008. The Trust for Public Land (TPL) (http://www.tpl.org)holds itself out as “a land conservation organization that conserves land for people to enjoy as parks, community gardens, historic sites, rural lands, and other natural places, ensuring livable communities for generations to come.”
http://www.tpl.org/tier2_sa.cfm?folder_id=170. Imagine the horror, this organization has been in the forefront of the recent wave of senseless proliferation of artificial turf fields around New York City, with no less than 18 crumb rubber infilled turf fields already in place and seven more in the works. These installations are part of a $25 million project to improve city school playgrounds.
In a news story reported by Adam Lisberg of the Daily News, it looks like the public furor over artificial turf fields has finally gotten the TPL’s attention. The Senior Public affairs Associate for TPL’s mid-Atlantic region, Troy Farmer, told Daily News that TPL “will switch to a different turf at the next seven it builds.” "We're moving away from the crumb rubber," he told Lisberg."There's really no firm evidence that there's anything to be frightened of, but as long as people are concerned, better safe than sorry," he said.
Now, only if the New York City officials, particularly the elected ones, could act in a semi-enlightened way like TPL! It cannot be that a program that is supposed to promote wellness should cushion itself on tens of thousands of tons of tiny bits of free-floating recycled tires or thermoplastic grains, each with its own environmental and health risks.
As Geoffrey Croft of NYC Park Advocates told Daily News, there are millions of these granules that are flying up in people's faces, people are eating them, and they wind up in the wash.
The irony: This infestation of NYC’s urban playgrounds with artificial turf and crumb rubber is going on in the name of serving the underprivileged and urban youth, who, unlike the children of the well-to-do, do not get to go to the bucolic surroundings in the tri-State area or up-State, to camps where they can enjoy nature and natural grass playing fields. They are sentenced to play on fake grass, among whose features is a surface temperature that runs 30 to 40 degrees hotter than natural grass, that is hotter than asphalt, on a typical sunny summer day in the city.
[No. 21] Who’s On First? New York backpedals on infill directive! SynTurf.org, Newton Mass. January 25, 2008.Just as you thought it was gone become safe once again for kids to play on artificial turf, out comes Frau Freitag (nicknamed “Friday”) and pulls the rug literally right from under the Specifications Department’s January 14, 2008, directive to suspend the use of rubber infill. See Item No. 20 below.
The Directive had been an internal memorandum. A copy of it apparently ended up in the hands of the NYC Park Advocates and on January 22, 2008, the Advocates spilled the contents of the memorandum to the public in a press release. No sooner than the press picked up on this and NYC Park Advocates’ bravado for bringing about the change, the Parks & Recreation Department went into spin control. The Deputy Commissioner of Capital Projects AmyFreitag put out a statement saying, “There is no change in the Parks Department's policy on synthetic turf and in the internal memorandum, I incorrectly made a blanket statement. As technology evolves, we are replacing a single standard and exploring the use of a carpet-style turf, particularly for asphalt conversions.” “The directive was meant to apply only to the conversion of asphalt to synthetic turf fields where a carpet-style turf may be more appropriate,” she continued. “In building sports fields,” she said, “we will continue to explore all appropriate technologies, including natural fields.” “There is no public health danger at any of these fields. On public safety, Parks is working with the Department of Health, which is conducting a study examining the health and safety risks and benefits of synthetic turf fields” Freitag assured the public.
The fact of the matter is that since 2002 Gotham has installed more than 77 artificial turf fields and has some 23 more on the drawing board. Contrary to Freitag’s statement, exactly when and where has the Parks and Recreation Department explored natural grass fields in the recent year? One must also question Freitag’s sincerity in assuring the public of the safety of artificial turf fields when, by her own admission, the Health Department is conducting a study examining the health and safety risks and benefits of synthetic turf fields. According to NYC Park Advocates’ January 22 press release, the City already has installed over 30,000,000 pounds (30 million) of the petroleum- and chemical-laced products in city parks over the last nine years. The city is currently installing millions of additional pounds.”
So, what possessed the Specifications Department to issue the Directive in the first place? According to Patrick Arden of New York City Metro, one of the co-authors of the Directive, Ms. Celia Petersen, the head of specifications, had received on July 6, 2006, a data sheet from Forever Green, a turf manufacturer, which stated “This product contains petroleum oils similar to ones categorized ... as causing skin cancer in mice after prolonged and repeated contact. Any potential hazard can be minimized by using ... protective equipment to avoid skin contact and by washing thoroughly.”Patrick Arden, “City asks for a mulligan on its toxic turf ban,” in New York City Metro, January 23, 2008, available at http://ny.metro.us/metro/local/article/City_asks_for_a_mulligan_on_its_new_toxic_turf_ban/11536.html. According to Arden “A variation on this last recommendation is now on the Health Dept.’s Web site: ‘As with any outdoor activity, it is recommended that after using the fields, people wash their hands before eating or drinking.’”
Obviously, as Arden also reported,Petersen’s directive to suspend rubber infill was a legitimate and precautionary response to increasing health concerns over the use of rubber granules from used tires. Perhaps the suspension of the infill would have been viewed as an admission of wrongdoing. Or perhaps the City now feared that it would have to vacuum out the rubber infill or worse yet replace the turf fields with a safe product? The bureaucratic consternation was strong enough to force an about-face on the part of the City.
Last December, 2007,Freitag received the Parks’ Twelfth Annual Award. Exactly how does a native of Akron, Ohio, with a BA from Smith College in Theatre and American Studies, and two Masters degrees from the University of Pennsylvania in Landscape Architecture and Historic Preservation end up endorsing artificial turf fields? Everything about Freitag’s biography would suggest a personality given to preservation of natural fields instead of mindless proliferation of turf and then even more mindless defense of them. Freitag’s biography is available at Parks and Recreation Department’sThe Daily Planet, vol. xvii, no. 3521, January 3, 2008, at http://www.nycgovparks.org/sub_newsroom/daily_plants/daily_plant_main.php?id=12510. She is regarded as “an outstanding administrator and role model,” who “is modernizing our preservation efforts while keeping our historic sites intact!” Moreover she is “an animal lover, gardener, and chef,” and “a rising star in the Parks world.” Maybe not.
[No. 20] New York City: Rubberinfill is out!SynTurf.org, Newton, Mass. January 25, 2005. On January 14, 2008, the New York City Parks & Recreation Department suspended the use of rubber infill synthetic turf in all parks capital projects. The internal memorandum prepared by Charles Rudesill and Celia Petersen and issued under the authority of Deputy Commissioner of Capital Projects Amy Freitag, the Design Directive 2008-1 (Synthetic Turf Fields) stated “Effective immediately, please discontinue use of Parks standard specification ‘Synthetic Turf-Infill Type’ and delete the words ‘infill material’ from detail 5 on standard detail sheet 40.” “Non-infill specifications for synthetic turf fields are available from our Specifications Department,” the Directive stated. A copy of the Directive was obtained by New York Park Advocates and it has been the subject of several news articles in recent days. For news article on this story, see Timothy Williams, “City Park officials Seek safety Review of Synthetic Surfaces,” in The New York Times, January 23, 2008, availablehttp://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/23/nyregion/23turf.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion&oref=slogin; Patrick Arden, “City asks for a mulligan on its toxic turf ban,” in New York City Metro, January 23, 2008, available at http://ny.metro.us/metro/local/article/City_asks_for_a_mulligan_on_its_new_toxic_turf_ban/11536.html. Click here for a copy of the Directive.
No. 19] Concern over synthetic turf is not going away! [Editor's Note] The Westport Brief on this site (see WrapUpArtcile, No. 2) chronicled the epic struggle of a number of Westport moms and public health experts to get answers about the health and safety issues associated with artificial turf fields. The story of Patricia Taylor and her son, Liam, was recently the human-interest hook for a health news story published on October 28, 2007, in The New York Times:
"Liam would come home with the tiny [rubber crumb] particles in his cleats, in his clothes and in his hair... 'Kids are tracking it back home, into washers and dryers, on the rugs and in their tubs. It's not just staying on the field. It's migrating.'... [Because of health and environmental implications of rubber crumb] Liam Taylor and his mother are proceeding with caution. This year, he is on the soccer team at the Hopkins School in New Haven, which does not have a synthetic turf field, and his mother refuses to let him play at any school that does have one. 'My job is to protect my son,' she said. 'Now that there is evidence of out-gassing, he will not be exposed until the fields are proven safe.'" Read more of this story by Jeff Holz, "Parents Raising Concerns Over Synthetic Turf," The New York Times, October 28, 2007, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/28/nyregion/nyregionspecial2/28turfwe.html?_r=1&oref=slogin. The story features also statements by physicians and public health experts, and calls for more study, caution and moratorium.
Text: http://www.news12.com/LI/topstories/article?id=201493#%22. PORT WASHINGTON - The use of artificial turf fields at Long Island schools is growing, yet the jury is still out on whether they put children at risk. Synthetic turf fields, like the 150 Landtech has sold to schools on the Island, are made with rubber from recycled tires. Grassroots Environmental Education's Doug Wood and other experts claim the used tires contain toxic metals and carcinogenic chemicals, and therefore so do the fields. "Tires are so full of toxic chemicals they have to be disposed of in a special landfill," Wood said. "So why would you grind them up and put them on a field where kids are going to play?" Ken Marlborough, athletic director for Port Washington schools, said Landtech assured him the artificial turf it installed was safe. Marlborough said the appeal of the $750,000 surface is its convenience. "The real benefit I think is that [it] is truly an all-weather surface," he said. "Even in a heavy downpour with[in] a matter of minutes, the field drains and can be ready to play on almost immediately." Landtech, which declined to speak on camera, said through a spokesperson that studies show the tire crumbs are not harmful. News 12 Long Island decided to test the claims, taking a sample from the Port Washington field for lab studies. The content levels of heavy metals were within government limits. However, some cancer-causing chemicals were well in excess of state safety levels. Chrysene, for one, was present in amounts more than 1,250 times the safe limits. Dr. David Carpenter, of Environmental Health and Toxicology, said the state Department of Health should impose a moratorium on the installation of artificial turf fields until enough research proves they are safe. A prominent New York toxicologist is conducting a study and promises to release her results in the near future.
WESTPORT - A expert on the environment and children's health told a small crowd at the Westport Public Library last night that parents should be wary of synthetic turf athletic fields, and he agreed that cities and towns should not rush to install the fields, which are made in part from recycled tires, until the health risks are determined. Dr. Philip Landrigan, who heads the department of community and preventative medicine at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York City, spoke about exposure to chemicals such as pesticides, lead and mercury, and how they affect children's' health....After recently reviewing a report from New Haven-based Environment and Human Health Inc., Landrigan said he agrees that the shredded tires and the affect on children's health should be studied further... The study found that under laboratory conditions the tire fragments released at least four dangerous compounds, including one recognized carcinogen, under slightly elevated temperatures. The compounds can irritate eyes, skin and mucous membranes. The rubber also was found to leach heavy metals into water...The organization has asked for a moratorium on the further installation of the synthetic turf fields until more research is done... "What we don't know at this point is to what extent do these toxic chemicals . . . get into kids' bodies," Landrigan said. He noted a study being conducted by Rutgers University utilizing a robot that will move around the fields and take air samples about a foot above the surface to measure the amount of chemical exposure. He said it also would be a good idea to work with groups of parents and obtain urine samples of children who use the fields, to see if chemicals are passing through their bodies. Landrigan also focused on the increasing incidence of asthma, childhood cancers and developmental disorders, such as autism. He said there are chemicals that haven't been tested for their possible toxicity, and children are more susceptible to exposure because they drink more water and often transfer substances to their mouths. Children also are still developing and they take longer to rid their bodies of chemicals, he said."We are conducting in our society a vast toxicological experiment," Landrigan said. There is evidence for environmental causes of developmental disorders, including lead, methyl mercury and polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, Landrigan said. He advised people to eat organic foods as much as possible, be informed about neighbors' pesticide use and encourage the use of "green" materials in schools. A multiyear study to examine the influence of environmental factors in children's' health and development is under way, Landrigan said. The National Children's Study, led by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Environmental Protection Agency, will follow 100,000 children from before birth to at least 18 years of age. "We believe it's our generation's best hope of detecting preventable diseases," Landrigan said. Nancy Alderman, president of Environment and Human Health, said last night that she was pleased Landrigan addressed the synthetic turf issue.One mother who attended the talk said she hadn't known about the concerns about synthetic turf, and that they surprised her. A field was recently installed behind Saugatuck Elementary School. "I had no idea that the turf was so dangerous and a concern," said Joan McCullough, who has a 4-year-old daughter. "It's made me more aware of what my daughter can be exposed to."
No. 16] Editor’s Note: In the news article about the health risks of artificial turf fields in Italy (below), reference is made to a substance called toluene. The article also refers to the European Union’s ban on PAHs in tire manufacturing beginning in 2007. In connection with these issues relating to rubber crumb, the readers may find of interest the following documents:
On tyre manufacture (UNEP/Basel Convention) [http://www.basel.int/meetings/oewg/oewg6/docs/oewg6_inf06.pdf]
On the EU’s registration, evaluation, authorization and restriction of chemicals program (REACH) [http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/06/st15/st15315.en06.pdf] and regulation thereof [http://reach.jrc.it/docs/Reach_legal_text_en.pdf] and corrigenda [http://www.lifesciences.at/download.asp?id=1556]
On UK’s implementation legislation of the REACH [http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/em2006/uksiem_20063311_en.pdf].
On call/report by Sweden’s KemI to ban the use of HA oils in tyre manufacture [http://kemi.se/upload/Trycksaker/Pdf/Rapporter/Rapport5_03.pdf] and press release [http://www.kemi.se/upload/Medier/Pressmeddelanden/2003/HA_press_release030327.pdf]
On restrictions on the use of toluene (EU) [http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2006/l_033/l_03320060204en00280081.pdf]
No. 15] Italy: Synthetic turf fields will be cleaned up!
Corrado Zunino, Erba sintetica, allarme confermato “Quei campi vanno bonificati,” in La Repubblica, May 3, 2006 – reproduced in its entirety below and also available at http://www.repubblica.it/2006/04/sezioni/cronaca/campi-sintetitici-cancerogeni/conferma-rischi-cancro/conferma-rischi-cancro.html. [Translated for synturf.org in part by Elio Branca]. The former Italian minister of Health, Francesco Storace’s last act in office was to make public on May 2, 2006, the study of a commission that he had set up in order to examine the potential risks associated with use of rubber in artificial turf fields. According to the study, the synthetic turf fields in Italy are potentially cancer-causing. The study found levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), toluene (volatile toxic compound), and heavy metals to be higher than the legal limits. The PAHs pose risks to kidneys, liver, and lungs. According to the investigators at the High Institute of Health (Instituto superiore di Sanita), the inhalation of the dust from these substances pose a risk to soccer players. The commission, which also included physicians and lawyers from the ministry of the Environment, urged the adoption of a law to clean up the dangerous fields.According to Professor Roberto Verna, the president of the commission, “It is clear that PAHs and toluene are a danger to health.” “We do not want to spread fear, but it is necessary to find a way to clean up the playing fields,” he said. “Let us say, all of the fields in Italy need to be examined, the 350 official ones and the dozens that have been installed without governmental approval,” he said. Accroding to Verna, the inspiration for defining the danger of artificial turf fields comes from the law about greens paces and parklands. The study document will be sent to FIFA, the world governing body for soccer, and to the European Union: the European Union already has prohibited the production of rubber with PAHs after 2007. “This study is the first such work in Europe that has been undertaken by an independent commission,” said Varna. "The rubber in the fields,” he said, “must be treated like dairy products: we must know about the origin of the rubber, the process and how its is made into its final form – to get a seal of approval/label of quality.”According to Carlo Tavecchio, president of national league of amateurs (Lega nazionale dilettanti), “we have to open up 200 fields and take out/vacuum the noxious substances. The cost will be divided among the Federal soccer organization, the producers of the turf and management of the clubs.” This will be a titanic undertaking. Each full-size soccer field (11 v. 11) contains 130 tons of infill and costs between 300,000 to 650,000 Euros. On the heel of the discovery of toxicity of the artificial turf fields, a pitched industrial battle is brewing between the producers of virgin rubber and recycled rubber, the big versus small. There is Olimpico that makes a product that is a mix of artificial grass and natural grass and does not need rubber. Then there are firms that manufacture foundations/underlay for artificial turf fields out of cork. The commission noticed a great number of children’s playgrounds are on rubber surfaces that are produced by the sane firms that manufacture the rubber for artificial turf fields. The SBR rubber is considered risky. According to Giovanni Lolli, undersecretary of Sports, “This is a serious problem. The commission has done diligent work: the next administration should reconvene the commission.”
Resi noti i risultati della commissione creata dall'ex ministro Storace. I tecnici del ministero della Salute rilanciano il rischio cancro. Erba sintetica, allarme confermato "Quei campi vanno bonificati," di CORRADO ZUNINO ROMA - L'ultimo atto del ministero della Salute uscente certifica l'allarme: i campi in erba sintetica costruiti in Italia sono potenzialmente cancerogeni. La commissione istituita da Francesco Storace, poi costretto a lasciare la guida del ministero, ieri mattina ha discusso in maniera accesa un paio d'ore e poi ha deciso - all'unanimità - di lasciare un documento-avvertimento al prossimo ministro della Sanità. In quel ponderoso lascito si dicono quattro cose decisamente serie. Nell'intaso di gomma che sostiene il manto d'erba artificiale, primo, ci sono quantità pericolose, in alcuni casi picchi elevati e comunque sempre oltre la soglia stabilita per legge, di Ipa (idrocarburi policiclici aromatici dannosi per reni, fegato e polmoni), toluene (composto volatile altamente tossico) e metalli pesanti. Quindi, seconda informazione, si stanno chiudendo gli studi su come questi elementi possano essere inalati dai calciatori in attività sui campi e le prime indicazioni dei ricercatori dell'Istituto superiore di Sanità preoccupano: le polveri che si sollevano giocando a pallone sono rischiose.
Terzo, sulle basi di queste scoperte scientifiche si deve realizzare una legge sui campi in erba artificiale, oggi inesistente. Infine, medici, avvocati del ministero dell'Ambiente e colonnelli dei Nas - tutti componenti della commissione - consigliano al prossimo ministro di emettere un'ordinanza per la bonifica dei campi pericolosi.Il professor Roberto Verna, ordinario di Patologia clinica della Sapienza di Roma, presidente della commissione, dice: "Ipa e toluene sono pericolose per la salute, questo è acclarato. I Nas hanno prelevato campioni di gomma in tredici campi: tutte le aziende e tutti i tipi di intasi hanno mostrato problemi. Non vogliamo seminare paure, ma è necessario trovare un modo per bonificare i terreni di gioco. Diciamo che tutti i campi italiani devono essere controllati, i 350 ufficiali e le decine di abusivi. Il metodo di controllo dovrà essere unico". Per definire i campi pericolosi il gruppo di lavoro si è ispirato alla normativa sul verde pubblico e alle tabelle dei parchi. Questo documento sarà inviato alla Fifa, l'organizzazione mondiale del calcio, e all'Unione europea, che già ha vietato la produzione di gomme con idrocarburi aromatici a partire dal 2007. "È il primo lavoro realizzato in Europa da una commissione indipendente. Le gomme, oggi, devono essere trattate come si fa con le mucche: dobbiamo sapere dove si raccoglie la materia prima, come si lavora, come arriva il prodotto finito. Ci vuole un'etichetta del prodotto". Il presidente della Lega nazionale dilettanti, Carlo Tavecchio, gestore discusso del grande affare campi artificiali, ha già parlato di rottamazione. "Dovremo aprire almeno duecento terreni e aspirare le sostanze nocive. Ripartiremo i costi tra Federcalcio, produttori dei campi e gestori". L'impresa è titanica: ogni campo a undici ha 130 tonnellate di intaso e costa tra i 300 e i 650 mila euro. Le aziende medio-piccole sono in grave difficoltà: "Abbiamo fatto forti investimenti quando i regolamenti erano provvisori e oggi i comuni interrompono i pagamenti e le banche ci chiedono di restituire i prestiti concessi". Intorno alla scoperta della tossicità dei campi è in corso, infatti, una dura battaglia industriale: produttori di gomma vergine contro riciclatori, grandi contro piccoli. In queste ore si sono fatti avanti, per esempio, i gestori del prato dell'Olimpico "realizzato con un prodotto misto di erbe naturali e artificiali che non ha bisogno di sottofondo" e alcune aziende che hanno messo a brevetto campi con fondi in sughero. La commissione del ministero della Salute ha scoperto, ancora, che una buon parte dei "parchi gioco" del territorio - le aree con scivoli e giostre presenti nelle piazze italiane - poggia su tappetini in gomma prodotti dalle stesse aziende che forniscono i campi in erba artificiale e realizzati con le stesse gomme riciclate: l'Sbr considerato a rischio. Giovanni Lolli, candidato sottosegretario allo Sport, dice: "Il problema è serio, questa commissione ha lavorato con serietà, il prossimo governo dovrà reinsediarla". (3 maggio 2006)
No. 14] Recyclers Used to Burning Rubber Are Now Idling, by Cindy Skrzycki, Washingtonpost.com, September 18, 2007 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/17/AR2007091701879.html [SynTurf.org Editor's Note: No sooner than you had bought the claim of turf sellers that old and out artificial turf carpet can be disposed off as fuel, here comes this item.This item covers a court-mandated change in a deacde-old EPA policy that allowed old tires to be burned as "alternative fuel."The rise of in-filled synthetic turf field industry came about a the same time as that policy, which made little of environmental and health hazard of used tires. As long as used tires were being "recycled" out of municipal disposal centers due to their hazardous nature and volume, EPA cared not!]
Text of article -- A new industry that recycles old tires into fuel, saving companies millions of dollars and reducing a billion-tire national stockpile, is in limbo after a U.S. appeals court tossed out some federal clean-air rules.In the past decade, owners of industrial boilers considered themselves do-gooders because they had the Environmental Protection Agency's blessing to burn alternative fuels, including old tires. Yet environmental groups said the practice dodged clean-air requirements by classifying incinerators as boilers, which have less stringent emission rules. On June 8, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia agreed, heading off a new EPA rule that was to go into effect last week and forcing the agency to come up with a new definition of "solid waste." "Tires will become a pariah if they are classified as a solid waste," said Michael Blumenthal, senior technical director for the Rubber Manufacturers Association in the District, which represents major tire manufacturers. He said the impact of the ruling would be "monumental." Michael Sorcher, president of M.A. Associates, a marketer of tire-derived fuel based in Overland Park, Kan., said the new industry has been thriving. It saves more than $100 million a year for such customers as International Paper of Memphis, and Holcim of Jona, Switzerland, the world's second-largest cement maker, he said. "This regulatory change doesn't just affect end users but the whole industry structure," Sorcher said, referring to makers of crumb rubber and other forms of recycled tire rubber. "It would be devastating for the industry in general." The court said facilities burning tires, wood, bark and other industrial wastes had been improperly classified by the EPA. The agency allowed facilities that "recovered energy" to be designated as boilers instead of following language in the Clean Air Act designating units that burn any solid waste as incinerators. "Had Congress intended to exempt all units that combust waste for the purpose of recovering thermal energy, it could likewise have expressly provided for their exemption in the statute," the ruling said. Robert Wayland, leader of the EPA's Energy Strategies Group in the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, said the agency wanted to encourage the use of alternative energy sources, including tire-derived fuel. "We thought we had the purview to include these," Wayland said. Cement kilns are the biggest users of tire-derived fuel, burning as many as 60 million tires a year, said Michel Benoit, executive director for the Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition in the District. The last thing his members want, Benoit said, "is another rule and charting into some unknown territory" that would make replacing coal with tires uneconomical. "Nobody has been ruled in or out at this point," said the EPA's Wayland, adding it will take at least two years to propose and complete a new rule that defines fuel and waste. Jockeying over the new proposal has already begun. The Rubber Manufacturers Association told the EPA on June 25 that it should modify any new rules to exempt tires from its definition of solid waste. The growth of markets for tire-derived fuel was nurtured by the EPA in the past 20 years to solve another environmental problem -- the billion-tire stockpile was a fire and disease risk. Environmentalists were unsympathetic to the plight of tire recyclers and their customers. "If they burn tires, they have to meet emission standards," said James Pew, staff attorney with Earthjustice, a District environmental law firm that argued the case with the Natural Resources Defense Council, a nonprofit group. "It's not our goal to crack down on them, just to get a better environmental result." The biggest users of tire-derived fuel said they will have to calculate the energy savings against the higher costs of being reclassified as an incinerator. "If it's 10 percent of the fuel they use and it's millions of dollars for more controls, mills will say it's just easier to switch fuels," said Timothy Hunt, senior director for air-quality programs at the District-based American Forest and Paper Association, which represents pulp, paper and wood mills that use biomass and tires as fuel. "Every paper mill will face that decision." He said that though states may step in with interim controls, facilities don't have a rule to comply with until the EPA comes up with a new standard. Whatever the outcome, at least one company thinks the decision will encourage a different form of recycling tires: freezing and then pulverizing them into powder that can be use in paint, tile, decking, automotive parts -- and new tires. Lehigh Technologies, a private company in Naples, Fla., uses about 7 million tires annually. One official there says the growth potential for its process is immense and doesn't have environmental consequences. "We're interested in converting the rubber into more beneficial uses," said Patrick George, Lehigh's chief financial officer. "We're just trying to figure out how this affects our business." Cindy Skrzycki is a regulatory columnist for Bloomberg News. She can be reached email@example.com.
No. 13] Divers removing failed tire reef project, by Brian Sokoloff., Associated Press Writer (Fri Jun 8, 9:15 AM ET). Fort Lauderdale, Florida -- It took only days to create what was touted as the world's largest artificial reef in 1972, when a well-intentioned group dumped hundreds of thousands of old tires into the ocean. Now divers expect to spend years hauling them to the surface. The tires turned out to be a reef killer, turning a swath of ocean floor the size of 31 football fields into a dead zone. Military crews began retrieving the tires this week from about 70 feet underwater, where they had broken loose from bundles and wedged along a natural reef. As of Thursday, they had pulled up about 1,600 of the estimated 700,000 tires that must be hauled to the surface. The tires are "a constantly killing coral-destruction machine," said William Nuckols, who is coordinating the cleanup. "They had to come up." The dumping of nearly 2 million tires began in 1972 with much fanfare by a group called Broward Artificial Reef Inc., which had the approval of the Army Corps of Engineers, support from Goodyear and help from hordes of volunteer boaters.
The rubber crumb is toxic. There is little doubt about it. What toxicological studies on rubber crumb measure is the health hazard of rubber crumb to humans and other living things. Toxicity of rubber crumb already has been shown in aquatic life. This conclusion was reached in 2003 Canadian study titled “Toxicological Evaluation for the Hazard Assessment of Tire Crumb for Use in Public Playgrounds,” by Detlef A. Birkholz, Kathy L. Belton and Tee L. Guidotti, and published in the Journal of Air & Waste Management Association, vol. 53: 903-907 (July 2003). The sellers of artificial turf often cite this study as proof that rubber crumb does not pose a health hazard to humans. Tthe researchers Birkholz, Belton and Guidotti designed a hazard assessment study to evaluate the potential human health and environmental concerns associated with the use of tire crumb in playgrounds. The human health concerns were addressed using conventional hazard analyses, mutagenicity assays, and aquatic toxicity tests of extracted tire crumb. They concluded that the hazard to children appeared to be minimal. However, toxicity to all aquatic organisms (bacteria, invertebrates, fish, and green algae) was observed; but the toxicity disappeared with aging of the tire crumb for three months in place in the playground. The study concluded, "the use of tire crumb in playgrounds results in minimal hazard to children and the receiving environment." For the abstract of the study go to http://secure.awma.org/journal/ShowAbstract.asp?Year=2003&PaperID=1089. For the full version of the study in PDF click here. The assurance of "minimal hazard" to humans does not mean absence of toxicity. As to humans and other air and land animals, the question of harm depends on the form, amount, concentration, and duration of exposure to the harmful substances in rubber crumb and its leachate. There was a time when DDT, asbestos, Agent Orange, smoking cigarette, second-hand smoke and transfats were all accepted and acceptable. In the City of Newton, Massachusetts, the public schools are latex-free environment.Yet, it is perfectly okay that Newton children and youth should wallow in polypropylene and plastic fibers and rubber crumb of an artificial turf field or tire crumb dust from rubberized playgrounds! One of the glaring omissions from toxicological studies of rubber crumb is reference to the adhesion of rubber crumb and synthetic fibers to the herbicide, fungicide, algaecide, and pesticides that are used in the maintenance of artificial turf fields. One should be concerned about the health hazards of rubber crumb also as a delivery mechanism for the residue of the toxins that are used to treat the fields.
Loose and plenty
No. 11] Rubber Infill. A typical multipurpose “new-generation” synthetic field contains a mix of some 10 tons of rubber crumb (granule infill) and 3 tons of sand.. The rubber crumb-and-sand mix is applied to the surface of the field and it is in the form of loose granule not larger than a small mouse dropping. The crumb and sand move about – laterally and vertically. Upon impact from a dropping body, slid or kick, the crumb and sand fly off in a puff-like dust. In most synthetic turf fields, the rubber crumb that has moved or washed off the field can be scooped up by the handful. The periodic treatment of the infill is therefore a crucial part of a well-maintained synthetic turf field. The thumbnails below depict the cross-sectional layout of a variety of rubber infill artificial turf fields. The fourth from left, shows the emerging modular natural grass format, whereby the natural grass field is rendered reparable by the help of previously grown and inventoried squares of natural grass.
A toxic cocktail
Typically, a rubber infill artificial turf consists of rubber crumb from recycled tires. There are other forms of rubber or combination of rubber and other substances but they are expensive enough to make the cost of an artificial turf field much prohibitively higher than natural grass fields. About 250 million scrap tires are generated in the US every year. The disposal of used tires in landfills or by incinerators has been a problem for a long time. Some 80 percent are ground up and recycled – 30 percent mixed with asphalt for highways; 30 percent mixed with plastics for molded products; and 15 percent used for athletic surfaces, including artificial turf. An average synthetic turf football or soccer fields uses 45,000 recycled tires that might otherwise take up space in the landfill. Ironically, the very article that is not readily disposable is being re-introduced into our environment in the form of granulated rubber crumb on our playing fields.
No. 10]Tyre Dust, by Pat Thomas. Ecologist. November 1, 2005. Pat Thomas is the Ecologist’s Health Editor. Excerpts: What goes into a tyre must also eventually come out. When a rubber tyre, bearing the weight of a vehicle, rolls across an asphalt or cement surface, tiny fragments of rubber, known variously as tyre dust or particulate matter, break off. Some become airborne and some are deposited at the side of the road, ready to be swept up by passing vehicles. Particulate matter is a very insidious form of air pollution and tyres contribute significantly to this form of pollution...Today we know differently. Several studies published in the last decade have demonstrated that about 60 per cent of these fragments are so small that they can enter the very deepest parts of the human lung. The particles of greatest concern are those that measure 10 microns or less in diameter (a human hair, by comparison, is about 70 microns thick and the dust motes that can be seen spiralling through the air when the sun shines through the window measure around 10 microns)...The microscopic dust that comes off tyres contains a unique mixture of substances that have a more powerful effect on the body than naturally occurring dust. To form the rubber into hard-wearing vehicle tyres, an extensive range of chemicals including xylene, benzene, petroleum naphtha, chlorinated solvents (for example 1,1,1- trichloroethane), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, anthracene, phenanthrene, benzo[a]pyrene, phenols, amines, oil, acids and alkalis (eg sodium hydroxide), polychlorinated biphenyls, halogenated cyanoalkanes, processing aids, and plasticisers. Tyre processing also involves several heavy metals including zinc, cadmium, lead, chromium and copper...In addition to generalised allergic responses, tyre dust also produces some very specific allergic responses. Tyres are made from a combination of natural latex, derived from rubber trees, and synthetic rubber derived from petroleum. At least 70-75 per cent of all natural rubber produced today is used to make tyres – the rest goes to making latex gloves and condoms, as well as paint and adhesives...The unique combination of known carcinogens, neurotoxins, heavy metals and other poisons in tyre dust can also be linked to more serious diseases. In a 1994 report on the adverse effects of particulate air pollution, published in the Annual Reviews of Public Health, researchers found that for every cubic metre of air, an increase of 20 micrograms (mcg) of particulate matter meant a one per cent increase in deaths from all causes. In this study deaths from respiratory failure, but also heart failure, were much more common as particulate levels increased. This estimate is echoed in the conclusions of a recent report by the non-profit Health Effects Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts, which found that death rates in the 90 largest US cities rise by 0.5 per cent with only a tiny increase – 10 mcg per cubic metre of air – in particles less than 10 micrometres in diameter. However, these findings may underestimate the real risk. This month a large, long-term study of residents in the Los Angeles, published in the journal Epidemiolog, found that for each increase of 10 micrograms per cubic metre of fine particles in the neighbourhood’s air, the risk of death from any cause rose by 11 to 17 per cent. The risk of death from diabetes rose more than two-fold and the risk of death from heart disease rose by an astounding 25 to 39 per cent. Similar findings were published in 2003 in Circulation: Journal of the American Heart Association, where researchers looking at 16 years of data on more than a million people concluded that long-term exposure to air pollution posed a greater risk of death from heart disease than it did for death from respiratory ailments...Why particulate pollution should have such an effect on the heart rate is still a mystery. One possibility is that when you inhale these very small particles deep into your lungs, some of them make their way into the bloodstream, where they find easy access to organs such as the heart. Once they become lodged in cardiac muscle, these particles may also initiate an inflammatory response that reduces blood flow and speeds the progression of atherosclerosis. Humans aren’t the only ones affected...Tyre dust is a significant source of pollution. But what happens at the end of a tyre’s lifecycle produces an altogether different kind of pollution. Piles of waste tyres are rapidly accumulating around the world. As of 2003, about 290 million tyres were discarded in the US every year (roughly one per person). In the UK around 40 million spare tyres accumulate each year. Since 2003 it has been illegal to dump whole tyres in landfills in the UK and by next year it will be illegal to dump chipped tyres into landfills as well. The disposal of tyre waste is now a major problem throughout the world and one to which there are no apparent solutions. Tyres are designed not to fall apart and this means that they are difficult to dispose of. Although they can remain substantially intact for years beyond their useful life, the number of dangerous chemicals in tyres mean that they can’t be safely burnt. Nevertheless, cement makers and paper mills are happy to use waste tyres as fuel – a disastrous enterprise that produces even higher levels of particulate pollution. Buried in the ground, their constituent chemicals leech out on the ground and water table. Used to make artificial reefs, they can provide homes for certain types of marine life, but are toxic to many fish. At the moment the best use of old tyres is to extend their life by retreading them. This process involves grinding down the surface, or casing, of the worn tyre until it is smooth and gluing a new veneer of tread onto it. While retreading a tyre uses far fewer resources than buying a new tyre, it is not entirely environmentally friendly since it still involves the use of non-renewable resources to make the new tread, and strong adhesives and other toxic chemicals to attach it to the old casing (and, of course it makes no impact whatsoever on the problem of tyre dust)... At every stage of a tyre’s life cycle, from the sourcing of raw materials to the mountains of waste tyres that blot the landscape, tyres are bad news for the environment...When government think tanks think about tyres, they focus on the environmental menace of waste tyres.. This is undoubtedly important, but clearly its scope is woefully inadequate. We’ve got to put the bigger picture of tyre lifecycles onto the agenda before we can even begin to reduce their impact on health and environment. Read the complete version at http://www.theecologist.org/archive_detail.asp?content_id=543.
No. 09]Infill granules. According to Melos GmbH, Melle, Germany(www.melos-gmbh.com), there are essentially four varieties of granule infill materials: The SBR infill material is the most cost-effective infill granules. The material has a high rubber content that gives it high elasticity. The carbon black gives it resistance to UV and the weather. Since this product is manufactured from recycled materials (principally old car tires) some variation in quality cannot entirely be ruled out. Depending on the length of time the original material was used, it may become brittle after a relatively short time. Because the material was originally manufactured for a different purpose this granule’s polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and zinc contents are extremely variable and may be quite high. It is not possible to flameproof this material. The PUR-coated SBR granules combines the elasticity of SBR materials with a free choice of colors. In price, this material lies between SBR and EPDM infill granules, which makes PUR-coated SBR the logical alternative where colored (green or brown) granules are to be used and where the material’s environmental toxicity is of secondary importance. It is not possible to flameproof this material. The EPDM infill granule has been around since the time rubberized artificial turf was first introduced. It is produced especially for playing fields and so the material can be tailored to individual requirements, so it is possible to supply flame-retardant and foamed granules in any desired color. EPDM infill granules are naturally non-fading and weatherproof. The use of suitable pigments prolongs colors, and choosing appropriate cross-linking chemicals produces a material with “excellent” eco-toxical properties and PAH values under 1 mg/kg. The thermoplastic elastomers (TPEs) are the very latest development in the field of infill granules. It can be made to specified elasticity and flame-retardant. This infill material has low wear and high elasticity, and its thermoplastic properties enable it to be recycled.
No. 8] Hazardous Chemicals in Synthetic Turf, by William Crain and Junfeng Zhang, Summer 2006 [The following article appeared in Rachel’s Democracy & Health News, No. 871: Hazards of Synthetic Turf, September 07, 2006. Rachel’s Environmental & Health News is a publication of Environmental Research Foundation, New Brunswick, New Jersey. The authors of the study: William Crain, Ph.D., is professor of psychology at The City College of New York and president of Citizens for a Green Riverside Park. Junfeng (Jim) Zhang, Ph.D. is professor and acting chair, Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, the School of Public Health, the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey and Rutgers University. On the web, this study is available at http://www.rachel.org/bulletin/index.cfm?issue_ID=2568]. A new generation of synthetic turf is becoming popular in the U.S. Brands such as FieldTurf are springier than the old AstroTurf and feel more like real grass. They also promise low maintenance costs. New York City is so attracted to the new synthetic turf that it is installing it in 79 parks, often substituting it for natural soil and grass. . However, the new artificial grass raises health concerns. In particular, the base of FieldTurf and similar brands includes recycled rubber pellets that could contain harmful chemicals. What's more, we have observed that on many New York City fields, the rubber pellets are also present on the surface. When one of us (William Crain) was picking up some pellets by hand, a boy told him that after playing in the park, he finds the pellets in his shoes at home at night. Because the rubber pellets are much more accessible to children and athletes than we had supposed, we decided to analyze a sample for two possible sets of toxicants -- polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and toxic metals. We collected our first sample from a new FieldTurf surface in Manhattan's Riverside Park in May, 2006. [Note: This is an error. The brand of artificial turf sampled in Riverside Park was A-Turf, not FieldTurf.] To gain information on the reliability of our results, we gathered a second sample in June, 2006 from a different part of the park.The PAHs were extracted in a Soxhlet apparatus with organic solvents. The metals were extracted by means of nitric acid with the aid of a high-efficiency microwave oven (Marsx Microwave). Both methods were used to estimate the maximum amounts of the chemicals contained in the bulk material (rubber pellets). The analyses were conducted at the Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute of Rutgers University. The PAH results for our first sample are listed as Sample 1 in Table 1, below. As the table shows, six PAHs were above the concentration levels that the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) considers sufficiently hazardous to public health to require their removal from contaminated soil sites. . It is highly likely that all six PAHs are carcinogenic to humans. The PAH results for Sample 2 are also listed in the table. Although the concentration levels in Samples 1 and 2 varied somewhat, the results for Sample 2 replicated the finding that the concentration levels of the six PAHs are above the DEC's tolerable levels for soil.
Table 1. Concentrations of PAHs (ppm: parts per million) Sample 1Sample 2DEC A-TurfA-TurfContaminated Rubber Pellets.…. Rubber PelletsSoil Limits Benzo(a)anthracene1.231.261.0 Chrysene1.327.551.0 Benzo(b)fluoranthene3.392.191.0 Benzo(a)pyrene8.583.561.0 Benzo(k)fluoranthene7.291.780.8 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene3.521.550.33 The analyses also revealed levels of zinc in both samples that exceed the DEC's tolerable levels. Lead and arsenic also were present, and many scientists believe that these metals should not be introduced into the environment at all. We want to emphasize that the findings are preliminary. PAHs in rubber might not act the same way as in soil, and we do not yet have information on the ease with which the PAHs in these rubber particles might be absorbed by children or adults -- by ingestion, inhalation, or absorption through the skin. However, the findings are worrisome. Until more is known, it wouldn't be prudent to install the synthetic turf in any more parks. We have informed the New York City Parks Department of our findings, but as far as we know, the Parks Department has not altered its plans to continue the installation of artificial turf in numerous parks. References:  New Yorkers for Parks: A New Turf War: Synthetic Turf in New York City's Parks -- Special Report, Spring 2006. www.NY4P.org. [2 ]6 NYCRR Part 375, Environmental Remediation Program, Draft Revised June 14, 2006, Department of Environmental Conservation, Table 375-6.8 (a) and (b).
No. 07] Banned in Sweden! The government of Sweden has banned the use of recycled tires in artifical turf. This progressive measure is being matched by the manufacturers in Germany, where more and more of the rubber used in synthetic turf is virgin rubber. In the United States there are no regulations as yet to ban the use of recycled tires; however, there are strict regulations governing the disposal and/or incineration of tires. The following pages reproduced here below contain the background and conclusions of the Chemicals Inspectorate of Sweden. [Click here for the full PDF version].
No. 06] Synthetic turf from a chemical perspective: a status report. Swedish Chemicals Inspectorate (March 2006). Background. Synthetic turf is used for football pitches around the world. This turf has many advantages, being hard-wearing and easier to maintain than natural grass. These pitches allow the football season to be extended, independently of the weather. Synthetic turf often contains rubber granulate from waste tyres, which in turn contain several substances with hazardous properties. A discussion is currently being carried out in several European counties, including Norway, Italy and Germany, concerning the properties of synthetic turf and the possible risks of using it. Many municipalities in Sweden have requested information and advice, as have manufacturers, representatives from football, and the general public. The Swedish Chemicals Inspectorate (KemI) has consequently prepared this report in order to discuss the properties and use of synthetic turf from a chemical perspective. This report provides a comprehensive survey and an assessment based on current knowledge. It is based to a large extent on results of investigations and assessments that have recently been carried out in Norway. Information has also been obtained from companies that deliver and install synthetic turf surfaces, the Swedish Football Association, sports administrations, environmental administrations, representatives from the recycling industry, and from the Swedish Standards Institute (SIS). KemI has also been in contact with the Swedish Work Environment Authority, the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, and the Norwegian Pollution Control Authority (SFT). Suppliers, representatives from football and authorities exchanged experiences concerning synthetic turf at a meeting held at KemI on 18 January 2005. The scope of the report is limited to synthetic turf that contains granulate from recycled tyres used for football pitches. Synthetic turf that contains other material, such as new rubber, thermoplastics and rubber-coated sand, have not been assessed. Other uses of recycled tyres, such as their use in playgrounds, for horse-riding surfaces and other sporting activities, have also not been assessed. KemI hopes that it will be possible to use this report as a basis for product development in synthetic turf companies, and for facilitating local decisions and assessments when laying synthetic turf surfaces. Summary.Synthetic turf is used for football pitches around the world. This turf has many advantages, being hard-wearing and easier to maintain than natural grass. These surfaces allow the football season to be extended, independently of the weather. Synthetic turf often contains rubber granulate from waste tyres, which in turn contain several substances of very high concern. A discussion is currently being carried out in several European countries, including Norway, Italy and Germany, concerning the properties of synthetic turf and the possible risks of using it. Many municipalities in Sweden have requested information and advice, as have manufacturers, representatives from football, and the general public. The Swedish Chemicals Inspectorate (KemI) has consequently prepared this report in order to discuss the properties and use of synthetic turf from a chemical perspective. The report briefly describes the health and environmental properties of certain substances, it summarises results from some relevant investigations into synthetic turf, and it describes the work for standardisation that is currently being carried out in Europe. Furthermore, Swedish environmental quality objectives and guidelines for the assessment of water quality and air quality are presented. KemI’s overall assessment is based on the material presented here. Conclusions.Recycling Tyres. It is often a good strategy to recycle material from worn-out products for reasons of energy economy and the efficient use of resources. This recycling, however, may conflict with attempts to minimise the risk of using chemicals. It is important before the new use of the material is started to determine whether it will lead to people or the environment being exposed to hazardous chemicals. A recycling perspective and a consciousness of chemical aspects should be included at the production stage, in order to be able to manage recycled material to a greater degree and in a safe manner. Tyres contain substances of very high concern.Tyres contain several substances that are substances of very high concern. These substances may persist in the environment, they may be bioaccumulative, carcinogenic, reprotoxic, or mutagenic. This is true of, for example, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), phthalates and certain metals. These substances should not be released into the environment and thus waste tyres should not be used for synthetic turf surfaces. The environmental objectives set down by the Swedish parliament state that substances of very high concern should be phased out from newly produced articles. Work is currently under way to reduce the levels of hazardous substances in tyres. The levels of PAHs will be regulated within the EU with effect from 2010. This means that the levels of substances of very high concern in tyres will, in time, decrease. It will, however, take time before PAHs disappear completely from rubber, and tyres contain more substances than just PAHs that have hazardous properties. It is important for this reason that the future recycling processes take place in a controlled and safe manner in order to avoid the spread and distribution of substances of very high concern. Synthetic turf contains substances of very high concern, but this does not necessarily mean that it is a direct risk for human health and the environment. The direct risk depends on the extent to which humans and the environment are exposed to the hazardous substances. Environmental Risks and Health Risks. The use of tyres in synthetic turf surfaces means that both humans and the environment will be exposed to recycled tyres in an uncontrolled manner that may lead to risks. It can be expected thatthe hazardous substances in the tyres are more readily released and spread when the tyres have been shredded to give a granulate with small granules than is the case when the use involves larger pieces of tyre in other contexts. There is a local environmental risk. Current knowledge allows the conclusion to be drawn that synthetic turf that contains rubber from recycled tyres may give rise to local environmental risks. Investigations have shown that zinc and phenols can leach from the rubber granulate, and these substances can affect aquatic and sedimentdwelling organisms, if they reach neighbouring water courses. The total amount of these substances that leaches from synthetic turf is small, however, and thus any effect on the environment that they have is expected to be local. Other sources may also contribute to increased levels of these substances in water courses. The health risks for players are probably low. Measurement of indoor air and exposure calculations have shown that there is probably a small health risk associated with simply being on or playing on synthetic turf surfaces that use rubber from recycled tyres. The exposure levels and any allergic reactions, however, have been poorly studied. Exposure to these substances from other sources, such as car exhaust, must also be taken into consideration to achieve a total assessment of health risks. KemI’s Recommendations.Do not select synthetic turf that contains substances of very high concern when laying new surfaces. Material that contains substances of very high concern should not be used, as specified by the environmental objectives of the Swedish parliament. This means that granulate formed from recycled rubber should not be used when laying new surfaces of synthetic turf. The Norwegian authorities have issued a similar recommendation. The Netherlands has also suggested that a similar requirement is included in the EU standard “Surfaces for sport areas – Synthetic turf surfaces primarily designed for outdoor use". New solutions must be developed and requested –the responsibility of companies. It is important that the recycled rubber in synthetic turf is replaced by material that truly is better from the point of view of health and the environment. It is the responsibility of companies to ensure that the products that are delivered are safe for people and the environment. The contents of new materials should be known and they should preferably have been assessed from the point of view of a total lifecycle effect on the environment. This means that companies must have expert knowledge about their products. Swedish companies should place demands on their suppliers and they should provide the drive required to develop better alternatives. The sports administrations in the municipalities and others who are involved when new surfaces are to be laid should request information about the contents of chemicals, and they should pose demands during the purchasing process and during installation such that substances of very high concern are not released into the environment.
No. 05] Potential health and environmental effects linked to artificial turf systems - final report, by Norwegian Building Research Institute (September 2004). [Click here for the full report in PDF].
The Norwegian Building Research Institute (NBI) carried out a study of potential health and environmental effects linked to artificial turf systems on behalf of the Norwegian soccer federation. The study covered three types of rubber granulate made from recycled rubber, one EPDM rubber granulate and two artificial turf fibers, which are in use in the Nordic region. The rubber granulates and artificial turf fibers were analyzed with regard to the total content of arsenic, cadmium, copper, chromium, mercury, nickel, zinc, PCB, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), phthalates and phenols. Leachate tests and degassing tests were also carried out. The study found the following with respect to the artificial turf fibers. They contained copper, zinc, individual phthalates, 4-t-octylphenol and iso-nonyl-phenol. The concentration of zinc and copper complied with the Norwegian Pollution Control Authority's normative values for most sensitive land use for both fiber types. The leachate from the fibers contained zinc. The concentration was higher than the Norwegian Pollution Control Authority's limit for zinc in water with Environmental Quality Class V (very strongly polluted water), but lower than the permitted zinc concentration in Canadian drinking water. As the measured concentration of environmental toxins (with the exception of copper) in the artificial turf fibers was lower than in the rubber granulates, and the artificial turf fibers in any case constituted a much smaller proportion of the artificial turf system in terms of mass. The study found the following with respect to the artificial turf fibers. The total analysis showed that the rubber granulates based on recycled rubber contain lead, cadmium, copper, mercury, zinc, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons,certain phthalates, 4-t-octylphenol and iso-nonylphenol. The total concentration of lead, cadmium, copper and mercury in the recycled rubber granulates was below the Norwegian Pollution Control Authority's normative values for most sensitive land use. The total concentrations of zinc and PAH in the recycled rubber granulates exceeded the Norwegian Pollution Control Authority?s normative values for most sensitive land use. The concentrations of dibutylphthalate (DBP) and diisononylphthalate (DINP) exceeded the PNEC values for terrestrial life taken from the EU's program for risk assessment. The concentration of isononylphenol was above the limits specified for cultivated land in the Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines. The leachate from the recycled granulates contained, PAH, phthalates and phenols. The concentration of zinc indicated that the leachate water was placed in the Norwegian Pollution Control Authority's Environmental Quality Class V (very strongly polluted water), but is lower than the permissible zinc concentration in Canadian drinking water. The concentration of anthracene, fluoranthene, pyrene and nonylphenols exceeded the limits for freshwater specified in the Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines. An expanded risk assessment with an analysis of possible spreading paths and changes in leaching properties over time was found to be necessary in order to determine the degree to which the concentrations of zinc, anthracene, fluoranthene, pyrene, phthalates and nonylphenols in the leachate are actually harmful to people and the environment. The recycled rubber granulates gave off a significant number of alkylated benzenes in gaseous form. Trichloromethane and cis-1.2-dichlorethene were also found. With the exceptions of chromium and zinc, EPDM rubber contained smaller quantities of hazardous substances than the recycled rubber types overall. It also gave off much smaller quantities of volatile organic compounds. The report suggested that further investigations of artificial turf concentrate on the rubber crumb component of the field. It recommended that measurements be taken of air quality above artificial turf fields in order to determine whether air quality is satisfactory.
No. 04] The Myth of Rubberized Landscapes, by Linda Chalker-Scott, Ph.D. [About the source: Chalker-Scott is an Extension Horticulturist and Associate Professor at the Puyallup Research and Extension Center at Washington State University. On the web, the study is available at http://www.puyallup.wsu.edu/~Linda%20Chalker-Scott/Horticultural%20Myths_files/Myths/Rubber%20mulch.pdf. In an e-mail to Dr. Chalker-Scott, the Managing Editor of this site asked if the same conclusion about rubber mulch could extend to the use of rubber crumb in synthetic turf fields. Dr. Chalker-Scott responded in the affirmative, as the base product (recycled tires) for rubber crumb in synthetic turf is the same as in rubber mulch]. The Myth: “Recycled rubber mulch is an environmentally friendly, non-toxic choice for landscapes.” Discarded rubber tires are the bane of waste management; according to the EPA, we generate 290 million scrap tires annually. Scrap tire stockpiles can pose significant fire hazards, such as the 1983 Virginia tire fire that burned for 9 months. Obviously finding a market for these slow-to-decompose materials is desirable, and many innovative uses have been developed, including rubberized asphalt, playground surfaces, and landscape mulches. From an engineering standpoint, crumb rubber as a soil amendment has performed favorably in reducing compaction to specialty landscape surfaces such as sports fields and putting greens. Rubber mulches are touted by manufacturers and distributors as permanent (“doesn’t decay away”) and aesthetically pleasing (“no odor” - “looks like shredded wood mulch” – “earth tones and designer colors” – “special fade resistant coating”) landscape materials. Furthermore, we are told that rubber mulch is “safe for flowers, plants and pets” (though it “doesn’t feed or house insects”) and “dramatically improves landscaping.” It seems to be an environmentally-friendly solution to a major waste disposal problem. The Reality:Rubber mulches have not proved to be particularly good choices for either horticultural production or landscape uses. In comparison studies of several mulch types, rubber tire mulch was less effective in controlling weeds in herbaceous perennial plots than wood chips. Similarly, sawdust made a better mulch for Christmas tree production in terms of weed control, microbial biomass, and soil chemistry. Another comparative study found rubber to be less effective than straw or fiber mulch in establishing turfgrasses. Not only do rubber mulches perform less effectively in the landscape, they possess an additional, unwanted characteristic. Compared to a dozen other mulch types, ground rubber is more likely to ignite and more difficult to extinguish. In areas where the possibility of natural or man-made fires is significant, rubber mulches should not be used. The Myth:“Permanence” of rubber mulch. The Reality: Far from being permanent, rubber is broken down by microbes like any other organic product. Many bacterial species have been isolated and identified that are capable of utilizing rubber as their sole energy source. Such bacteria have been found in a variety of environments, including the cavity water of discarded tires. Although some of the additives used in tire manufacture are toxic to rubber-degrading bacteria, there are white-rot and brown-rot fungal species that can detoxify these additives. While isolating these microbes has been beneficial in developing natural mechanisms to recycle rubber products, it also points out the fallacy of assuming that rubber mulch is “permanent.” Furthermore, it alerts us to the very real possibility that car tires leach toxic compounds into the landscape. TheMyth: “Non-toxicity” of rubber mulch. The Reality:Current research at Bucknell University indicates that rubber leachate from car tires can kill entire aquatic communities of algae, zooplankton, snails, and fish. At lower concentrations, the leachates cause reproductive problems and precancerous lesions. A similar study exploring the use of tires as artificial reef substrates also found rubber leachate to negatively affect the survival of various seaweeds and phytoplankton. Marine and other saline environments are less sensitive to tire leachates, however, and the greatest threat of contamination appears to be to freshwater habitats. Part of the toxic nature of rubber leachate is due to its mineral content: aluminum, cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, molybdenum, selenium, sulfur, and zinc have all been identified in laboratory and field leachates. If rubber products have been exposed to contaminants during their useful lifetime, such as lead or other heavy metals, they will adsorb these metals and release them as well. Of these minerals, rubber contains very high levels of zinc – as much as 2% of the tire mass. A number of plant species, including landscape materials, have been shown to accumulate abnormally high levels of zinc sometimes to the point of death. One USDA researcher who has studied zinc and other metals in soils and plant materials for decades strongly believes that ground rubber should not be used “in any composting, or in any potting medium, or casually dispersed on agricultural or garden soils” because of zinc toxicity. Acidic soils and aquatic systems are particularly sensitive, since heavy metals and other positively charged elements are less tightly bound to the soil and more available to plant and animal uptake. Rubber leachates are complex solutions. They include not only the minerals and organic building blocks of rubber, but also various plasticizers and accelerators used during the vulcanizing process. In high enough concentrations, some of these rubber leachates are known to be harmful to human health; effects of exposure range from skin and eye irritation to major organ damage and even death. Long term exposure can lead to neurological damage, carcinogenesis, and mutagenesis. Some of these materials break down quickly, while others are known to bioaccumulate. One of the more common rubber leachates is 2-mercaptobenzothiazole, a common accelerator for rubber vulcanization. In addition to its known human health concerns, it is highly persistent in the environment and very toxic to aquatic organisms: its environmental persistence may cause long-term damage to aquatic environments constantly exposed to rubber leachates. Another family of organic leachates under scrutiny are the polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). These compounds, used as rubber softeners and fillers, have been repeatedly demonstrated to be toxic to aquatic life. PAHs are released continually into solution, and after two years in a laboratory test leachates were shown to be even more toxic than at the study’s inception. It is abundantly clear from the scientific literature that rubber should not be used as a landscape amendment or mulch. There is no question that toxic substances leach from rubber as it degrades, contaminating the soil, landscape plants, and associated aquatic systems. While recycling waste tires is an important issue to address, it is not a solution to simply move the problem to our landscapes and surface waters. The Bottom Line - Rubber mulch is not as effective as other organic mulch choices in controlling weeds. - Rubber mulch is highly flammable and difficult to extinguish once it is burning. - Rubber mulch is not permanent; like other organic substances, it decomposes. - Rubber mulch is not non-toxic; it contains a number of metal and organic contaminantswith known environmental and/or human health effects.
No. 03] Environmental impact of highway construction and repair materials on surface and ground waters. Case study: crumb rubber asphalt concrete,by M.F. Azizian, P.O. Nelson, P. Thayumanavan and K.J. Williamson
The practice of incorporating certain waste products into highway construction and repair materials (CRMs) has become more popular. These practices have prompted the National Academy of Science, National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) to research the possible impacts of these CRMs on the quality of surface and ground waters. State department of transportations (DOTs) are currently experimenting with use of ground tire rubber ( crumb rubber) in bituminous construction and as a crack sealer. Crumb rubber asphalt concrete (CR-AC) leachates contain a mixture of organic and metallic contaminants. Benzothiazole and 2(3H)-benzothiazolone (organic compounds used in tire rubber manufacturing) and the metals mercury and aluminum were leached in potentially harmful concentrations (exceeding toxic concentrations for aquatic toxicity tests). CR-AC leachate exhibited moderate to high toxicity for algae ( Selenastrum capriconutum) and moderate toxicity for water fleas ( Daphnia magna). Benzothiazole was readily removed from CR-AC leachate by the environmental processes of soil sorption, volatilization, and biodegradation. Metals, which do not volatilize or photochemically or biologically degrade, were removed from the leachate by soil sorption. Contaminants from CR-AC leachates are thus degraded or retarded in their transport through nearby soils and ground waters. Source: The authors are affiliated with Department of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon. The lead-author, Azizian is with Department of Civil Construction and Environmental Engineering at Oregon State University (e-mail: Mohammad.Azizian@oregonstate.edu). On the web the foregoing abstract is available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=14522190&dopt=Abstract.
No. 02]A Colorado study entitled “A Case Study of Tire Crumb Use on Playgrounds: Risk Analysis and Communication When Major Clinical Knowledge Gaps Exist,” by Mark E. Anderson,Katherine H. Kirkland,Tee L. Guidotti,and Cecile Rose, and published in Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 114, no. 1 (January 2006) admits that there exists a serious gap in the risk assessment of rubberized playground surfaces, which use rubber crumb from recycled tires. For the full length report in PDF format click here.
No. 01] TenCate Thiolon Product Advisory [Excerpts]. Click here for full PDF version Rubber infill is an important component of an artificial turf system. It affects a sport’s technical characteristics as well as the performance of the artificial turf field itself. According to Thiolon advisory, “It can also be a hazard for the UV stability and durability of the artificial turf fibers.” Mainly 2 kinds of rubber are used for artificial turf systems, virgin EPDM rubber and regenerated (recycled) SBR rubber. The processing oil can leach out of the rubber. In laboratory tests, these oils can be extracted from the rubber. Apart from the extracted quantity, the type of extracted (leachable) component is also important. Tests in the Thiolon laboratory showed that SBR rubber showed a weight decrease of 5.3% after extraction. The extracted material is brown and consists of aromatic and naphthenic oil. The EPDM rubber showed a weight decrease of 9.6% after extraction. The extracted material is transparent and consists purely of paraffin oil. Chemicals within rubber infill materials could affect the UV stability of (non LSR) artificial grass fibers, especially that of PP fibers. Wear and powdering. Both EPDM and SBR rubber are originally manufactured for different use. Car tires are manufactured to resist extensive and long use. EPDM infill material is made especially for the use in artificial grass. Consequently, SBR rubber has a higher resistance to wear and tear. Morphology. Stud roll tests showed that baculiform particles generate more wear of the artificial grass [than] "normal" sherical particles. In order to judge the shape of rubber particles, we can calculate the "roundness." Roundness equals the samllest particle dimension over largest particle dimension. Particle size distribution.Thiolon advises to use rubber particles that show a distribution of particle sizes between 0.25 and 3.0 mm. An infill rubber with these particle sizes can be considered as a good quality infill material. According to the advisory, “Particles smaller than 0.25 mm are considered as dust and can build a health risk.” Source: TenCate Thiolon Product Advisory: Requirements of rubber infill materials (Issue 2005-02) -- PAThiolon@tencate.com, www.tencate.com, www.thilon-grass.com.
No. 00] Hazardous waste --a pictorial. The pictures below depict "how not to dispose of trash" that is associated with turf fields. The picture of migrating rubber crumb was taken under the bleachers located some ten feet away from the field itself. Coyote look-a likes do not work to keep the geese and other pooping birds away from turf fields. The dogs chasing the birds away seems to be the best way to stop birds from visiting and soiling the fields. But as long a there is natural grass strips and approaches to a turf field, the geese and ducks and seagulls may visit.