![Earth Earth](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/earth_64.png)
Are Fake Plastic Lawns Environmentally Irresponsible? (yahoo.com) 106
"The artificial turf industry has had a great deal of success convincing millions of people that its short-lived, nonrecyclable, fossil-fuel-derived product is somehow good for the environment," complains the head of Los Angeles' chapter of the advocacy nonprofit, the Climate Reality Project.
In an opinion piece published in the Los Angeles Times, he argues that "In fact, it's clear that artificial turf is bad for our ecosystems as well as our health."
The piece's title? "What's more environmentally irresponsible than a thirsty L.A. lawn? A fake plastic one." Artificial turf exacerbates the effects of climate change. On a 90-degree Los Angeles day, the temperature of artificial turf can reach 150 degrees or higher — hot enough to burn skin. And artificial turf is disproportionately installed to replace private lawns and public landscaping in economically disadvantaged communities that already face the greatest consequences of the urban heat-island effect, in which hard surfaces raise local temperatures.
Artificial turf consists of single-use plastics made from crude oil or methane. The extraction, refining and processing of these petrochemicals, along with the transporting and eventual removal of artificial turf, come with a significant carbon footprint.
Artificial turf is full of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, known as "forever chemicals" because they accumulate in the environment and living tissue. The Synthetic Turf Council has noted manufacturers' efforts to ensure that their products "contain no intentionally-added PFAS constituents." So what? Tobacco companies don't intentionally add carcinogens to cigarettes; they're built into the product. PFAS have been linked to serious health effects, and while artificial turf is by no means the only source of them, it is one we can avoid. Because artificial turf is a complex product made of multiple types of plastic, it will never be recycled. After its relatively short lifespan of about eight to 15 years, artificial turf ends up in indefinite storage, landfills and incinerators, creating a whole host of additional pollution problems...
Remarkably, artificial turf doesn't even save water compared with grass... [A]rtificial turf must be regularly cleaned with water, and in warm climates such as Los Angeles', artificial fields get so hot that schools must water them down before children play on them.
Astroturf also doesn't absorb rainwater, the piece poitns out.
In fact, studies show the maintenance costs of artificial turf often exceed those of natural grass.
Thanks to Slashdot reader Bruce66423 for sharing the article,
The piece's title? "What's more environmentally irresponsible than a thirsty L.A. lawn? A fake plastic one." Artificial turf exacerbates the effects of climate change. On a 90-degree Los Angeles day, the temperature of artificial turf can reach 150 degrees or higher — hot enough to burn skin. And artificial turf is disproportionately installed to replace private lawns and public landscaping in economically disadvantaged communities that already face the greatest consequences of the urban heat-island effect, in which hard surfaces raise local temperatures.
Artificial turf consists of single-use plastics made from crude oil or methane. The extraction, refining and processing of these petrochemicals, along with the transporting and eventual removal of artificial turf, come with a significant carbon footprint.
Artificial turf is full of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, known as "forever chemicals" because they accumulate in the environment and living tissue. The Synthetic Turf Council has noted manufacturers' efforts to ensure that their products "contain no intentionally-added PFAS constituents." So what? Tobacco companies don't intentionally add carcinogens to cigarettes; they're built into the product. PFAS have been linked to serious health effects, and while artificial turf is by no means the only source of them, it is one we can avoid. Because artificial turf is a complex product made of multiple types of plastic, it will never be recycled. After its relatively short lifespan of about eight to 15 years, artificial turf ends up in indefinite storage, landfills and incinerators, creating a whole host of additional pollution problems...
Remarkably, artificial turf doesn't even save water compared with grass... [A]rtificial turf must be regularly cleaned with water, and in warm climates such as Los Angeles', artificial fields get so hot that schools must water them down before children play on them.
Astroturf also doesn't absorb rainwater, the piece poitns out.
In fact, studies show the maintenance costs of artificial turf often exceed those of natural grass.
Thanks to Slashdot reader Bruce66423 for sharing the article,
Before irrigation southern Calif was desert & (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
If only there was a word for that.
"Xeriscaping is the practice of designing landscapes to reduce or eliminate the need for irrigation. This means xeriscaped landscapes need little or no water beyond what the natural climate provides. "
Oh.
Calling nonsense - elephant in the room (Score:3)
The worry about microplastics and plastic chemicals getting into the environment from artificial lawns is tiny.
Synthetic clothing fibers are one of largest sources of microplastics introduced into the environment. It's a much larger issue than the tiny fraction of artificial lawns.
https://www.bu.edu/sph/news/ar... [bu.edu]
- more than 100 pounds of textile waste per person each year.
- Once textiles are discarded, 66% of them are sent to landfills
-the gas and chemical leachates that emerge during the decomposition pr
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Calling nonsense - elephant in the room (Score:1)
Why would watering your lawn cost a ton of money? I pay like $50 for water every 3 months with two households, we have sprinklers running for the kids all summer.
Re: (Score:1)
I live in Western Oregon where rain is plentiful. My monthly water bill for a family of four is $300. I barely run the sprinklers in July and August. It all depends on how your local politicians jack up regulations and such.
Re: Calling nonsense - elephant in the room (Score:1)
My water is arranged by private companies, it is ultra clean like the rest of my utilities (cheap electric comes from nuclear so I only need gas as a backup heat source).
Politicians should not get involved in basic necessities.
Re: Calling nonsense - elephant in the room (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
At the home of one of my relatives that lives in the La-La Land area they replaced the front yard with 1 inch to 1.5 inch light-colored gravel about 2-3 inches thick.
Rainwater, when it happens, can still penetrate to the soil beneath, but the soil beneath is much less likely to erode and move in a rain storm.
Best of all, it keeps weeds away and requires no maintenance. And it is a reasonable walking surface if you are wearing reasonable shoes; heels and flats do not apply.
Downside: it is boring to look at.
Re:Before irrigation southern Calif was desert &am (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
There are many plants other than cactus that will survive in LA just fine without artificial irrigation. I mean, there were plants there before white people. It just won't look like the perfect British lawn we all decided to imitate for some odd reason. (Surprise, LA is not in Britain)
Re: (Score:1)
So if I could not keep a green lawn watered I would make my front yard a mix of sand & pea gravel and plant some cactus that stay small and grow slowly and never needs water
there's been a push for years in CA to use "drought-resistant" plants (i.e. native plants) in lieu of traditional grass/flowers/what have you.
theyre usually accompanied by gravel/rocks/wood chips.
looks very nice when done well.
Or maybe we could just spot maintaining lawns (Score:5, Interesting)
The lawn as we know it today - that is, artificial grass that you have to plant, water and mow regularly instead of doing something fun because your local HOA gives you crap if you don't - is, like the suburban house, a pathetic attempt by the middle class to imitate the aristocracy.
Before the mid 19th century and the invention of the lawn mower, lawns were the preserve of the truly rich, who could afford to pay staff to look after them. It was a symbol status: the perfect lawn and the big mansion basically said "I have the means to have these useless things and you don't".
The lawns in front of modern McMansions too is a status symbol: it scream "I don't have the money to have a real country estate". And astroturf is even worse: it scream "I don't even have the money for real grass."
Maybe we could return to houses without a stupid lawn. Me, I quit caring for any lawn two decades ago. My garden is basically just a unkempt field full of wild flowers, and when my neighbor's goat isn't available to do some clearing up for free, I mow it once or twice a year tops with a scythe, which provides me with fun exercise but not too often that it gets to be a chore.
Fuck immaculate lawns: I only have a finite number of hours on this dirtball and the last thing I want to do is spend any of them tending grass to mimick the landed aristocracy that I'm not part of.
Re: Or maybe we could just spot maintaining lawns (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe we could return to houses without a stupid lawn.
But you already identified the objection: HOAs.
I have a lawn. But it's pretty weedy, overrun by wildflowers. When the neighbors give me crap about it, I just tell them that it's an experiment in biodiversity.
For places like So. Cal, there is a solution: xeriscaping.
Re: (Score:3)
But you already identified the objection: HOAs.
Yeah HOAs are a problem. I moved to a place when those things don't exist a long time ago. But I realize many people don't have that option. Especially if they already own the house and the HOA is setup later - as opposed to avoiding moving to places where there's a HOA already there. Not to mention, HOAs are increasingly hard to avoid if you don't want to move somewhere really remote.
HOAs need to be made illegal. It's probably not gonna happen in my lifetime though, so I moved as far the hell away from the
Re: Or maybe we could just spot maintaining lawns (Score:5, Interesting)
Or you work at the state level to outlaw lawn chemicals and pesticides and get legislation passed that prohibits HOAs from restricting native landscaping - Maryland did some of that
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
and the HOA is setup later
How do they do that? Once I own a home and property, what compels me to enter into an agreement which will restrict my rights? Aside from a pre-existing covenant attached to the property prior to my purchase. Which is essentially what an HOA is.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem of HOA is not that their votes are unequal - people don't get 100% equal votes in US president election either.
The problem of HOA is that they are tedious to participate, no proper salaries for board members, but then they get overwhelming power to the neighbourhood. So who end up staying in the board are often either corrupted or control-freaks. Sane normal people in the board get exhausted and surrender or quit.
Imagine all elected representatives in the government are to be unpaid volunte
Re: (Score:2)
xeriscaping, well all I have to say is fuck weeds and mulch. Its a nice idea but often executed poorly resulting a lot of maintenance and chemical use. Kids hate it when their balls/toys end up in a cactus garden. Tradeoffs. I'm not advocating for a green lawn and definitely not a plastic one. A lot of people are planting common lippia (kurapia) in the last couple of years.
Re: Or maybe we could just spot maintaining lawns (Score:4, Funny)
Kids hate it when their balls/toys end up in a cactus garden.
I completely overlooked that aspect of it. Now I won't have to stand on the front porch, screaming at them to stay off my lawn. No lawn. And the landscaping is persuasion enough.
Re: (Score:2)
In that case, a thick hedge of pyracantha will keep people away and provide privacy for your cactus garden.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The lawn as we know it today - that is, artificial grass that you have to plant, water and mow regularly instead of doing something fun because your local HOA gives you crap if you don't - is, like the suburban house, a pathetic attempt by the middle class to imitate the aristocracy.
It can be a little more complex than just imitating the hoi-polli.
But yes, if you can support something in opposition to a grass lawn, some of them can be pretty cool. There's a person who lives on our street that has a gorgeous wildflower lawn. I think they do a little grooming, but the results are pretty cool.
In my particular spot in the woods, a natural lawn consists of piles of leaves, and the local weather has them rotting. We have some really big trees - like 100 foot plus Oaks, Maples and Hick
Re: (Score:2)
My mother had a goat. It not only ate the plastic top off her car, it ate a bunch of fiberglass that she was planning to use for insulation, (Didn't seem to hurt it.)
Re:Or maybe we could just spot maintaining lawns (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If you have a patch of dirt in the sun you can get a lawn going
Unless you live in a desert why would you have a patch of dirt in the sun? Would natural weeds grow there? They are far better for the environment, and frankly your kids don't care about flat green grass, unless they are called Karen and at their school they say "When I grow up, I want to be president of the HOA".
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe lawns should be repurposed. They came into style after WWII. Before that, people had victory gardens where the area in the front yard was used for growing crops. It may not be much, but growing some tomatoes and other high yield per square unit area can help with distribution and reduce dependence on insanely long supply chains.
The only downside of having a front garden is to have to fence it in, otherwise any stuff that grows likely will be filched by anyone passing by on the street. However, hav
Re: Or maybe we could just spot maintaining lawns (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on the time and place. Sometimes sheep, sometimes cattle. Sometimes some other approach. (It also depends on just how rich the proprietor was. Hayfields are not unknown for the "richest guy in the valley", but I forget which century that source was talking about. [I think it was England or Wales though.])
They stink (Score:5, Interesting)
Their solution? Wash the lawns. Which, if it was real grass, would be called watering the lawn.
Re: (Score:2)
Not only dogs pee, they have their own plastic stink when they're new too. At I company I worked at years ago the CEO had the genius idea to put some in the rec room to make it look more friendly (or something). Upshot was the place stank of chemicals and the room became unusable as the air con couldn't clear the air fast enough. 6 months later it was gone - what a waste of resources not to mention pollution when it got burnt or landfilled.
Re: (Score:2)
unusable as the air con couldn't clear the air fast enough
air conditioners do not clean or exchange the air, it just gets rid of the heat and pumps the same air back in.
Re: (Score:2)
It can - some air conditioning systems have an exchange for fresh air, and my family generally put higher quality filters in as well, so it at least gets filtered.
Not guaranteed of course, but if the "rec room" involved exercise I'd definitely look into a heat exchanger vent system - outgoing air is used to treat incoming air before the actual conditioning radiator.
Re: (Score:1)
Mine doesn't stink from the dogs peeing on it. Maybe it's that I bought a more premium turf designed to drain and they put down six inches of gravel and crushed rock under it to help it drain. What I can say is that I no longer have mud being tracked in the house all Winter from the dogs going out to do their business. Not to mention the completely destroyed lawn I was having to re-sod every Spring. It also stinks much less than the pee absorbing in to the top surface of the clay soil and not washing aw
Re: (Score:2)
I know 2 people with artificial lawns and they both have the same problem. Dogs pee on them, then the pee can't drain and it smells. A couple dogs a week for a few weeks and you have quite the stench on a hot summer day.
Oh, that's just nasty.
Fake lawns are just creepy anyhow.
Re: (Score:2)
then the pee can't drain
This has to be bullshit. What the fuck happens to the artificial lawn when it rains for more than 2 minutes? It just immediately becomes a pool of water?
If so, that is just a shitty artificial lawn. They can be made to have even better drainage than an average natural grass surface.
The PFAS thing is also something that I think can be easily ameliorated.
The higher temperatures of artificial grass do seem like something that can't be avoided easily.
Re: (Score:2)
I've never seen an artificial lawn with a root system, so I doubt they could have better drainage. OTOH, I've never encountered one that wouldn't just pass the water though to whatever it was lying on. (That's NOT good drainage, though. Good drainage infused it down into the soil.)
Re: (Score:1)
My real lawn never drained. Clay soil just let the water pool on top. My turf with six inches of gravel under it drains great. It's going to depend on your soil type for grass and how well they prepared the surface for turf as to which drains better.
Re: (Score:2)
It just immediately becomes a pool of water?
Yes. Like literally yes, that is one of the big problems with artificial laws, they have horrendous draining on par with just putting down a cement slab.
They can be made to have even better drainage than an average natural grass surface.
No. They may have better draining than a shitty turf laid on an inappropriate substrate but any even remotely healthy natural grass is absolutely brilliant for drainage. Drainage of water into the ground is achieved through deep roots and a healthy soil composition.
But I do like how you say "can be made". That implies some serious engineering effort that a)
Re: (Score:3)
I know 2 people with artificial lawns and they both have the same problem. Dogs pee on them, then the pee can't drain and it smells. A couple dogs a week for a few weeks and you have quite the stench on a hot summer day.
They did something wrong when they installed it. Artificial turf has large holes all over it for water to drain through, and even if they put weed cloth under it, it should still drain reasonably well. So that means whatever they put *under* the turf isn't allowing water to drain.
Artificial grass doesn't *absorb* water, as in it isn't alive, so it doesn't *use* water, but it should absolutely allow it to soak into the ground, or else something is wrong. How do I know? Because weeds keep growing up throu
Re: (Score:2)
Part of my lawn has turned into a mix of white clover and plantains of some variety. There is also red clover and there and a good number of dandelions. The bees are quite happy.
Re: (Score:2)
It's been badly installed without proper drainage then. My little patch had my dog pissing on it for years and never smelled once.
Yes (Score:1)
In addition (Score:3)
I didn't even know that tis existed (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Before I moved (a couple of moves ago) I had some neighbors who had astroturf lawns. It really *is* still a thing, and some people like it.
The problem with natural landscape (Score:2)
The problem with natural landscapes is that it's fire prone in many areas, like ours.
We're going with hardscape, well-spaced succulents, and gravel around the house. Eventually we hope to do a 30-foot perimeter, which will be hard with the hillside. I've got a lot of dangerous trees to remove, but it's better than our house burning down.
Re: (Score:2)
From what I remember, that would be well above and beyond fire recommendations. I'm not an expert, but I've read several fire protection guidelines written by universities and such.
For example, after the fire basically burned all of Paradise, CA down, a browsing of google map images, where you have the actual pictures from the roads, I was able to point out a violation quickly and easily in nearly every case. Things like bushes and hedges right up against the building - which means that if the bush catche
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with natural landscapes is that it's fire prone in many areas, like ours.
Perennial ryegrass? St. Augustine grass? As long as you water it, one or both of those should stay green all year around in California, depending on where you are. If you're up in Oregon or Washington, no idea.
Re: (Score:2)
Watering is an issue.
Re: (Score:1)
Watering is an issue.
Watering is only an issue because your corrupt politicians are unwilling to spend money on desalination that it has been obvious was necessary for the last couple of decades, because they didn't want to spend money only for rains to come back and have the water shortages not be critical anymore, so instead, they defer things until they are too broken to deal with and make everyone suffer ridiculous water prices and quantity restrictions on an ongoing basis so that they don't get blamed for spending money.
Ne
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, as has been pointed out before, the problem with a democracy is that the government represents a fair cross-section of the population.
No, the problem with a democracy is that the people elected don't represent the population. They represent themselves. There are never any good choices from either party in any election — only bad choices and mediocre choices. When you have a choice between a douche and a turd sandwich, it really doesn't matter who you pick.
So I guess not too many Californians see the world your way, huh?
Highly unlikely. If you actually put funding for desalination plant construction on the ballot as an independent ballot initiative, I'm certain that it would pass overwhelmingl
Re: (Score:2)
I can think of a couple places I'll bet you'd love - one question first, do you prefer rice or borscht?
So believing that our democracy is screwed up — a perception that an overwhelming majority of Americans would agree with, BTW — makes you think I'd rather be in a totalitarian country? Seems to me like the sort of thing that would be said by someone who is actively part of the problem.
Sorry, just realized your reply was to the reply to my post. But still, arguing that the rights of the minority should be suppressed for the sake of the minority is actually pretty much the opposite of what democracy is supposed to achieve. And the post you replied to is not wrong that inland areas have way less power in California than most states. Giving them their own state would fix that. It would not, of course, fix this particular problem, and would cause a lot of different problems (IMO), but it'
Re: (Score:2)
This is California we are talking about. You know, the ones that never do anything about the Salton Sea until the dead fish smell reaches LA, then stuff gets done.
The problem with CA is that all their politicians are elected by popular vote. Unlike other states where they have a senate which is geographical and a house that is popular, both sides of CA's lawmaking body are elected by population. This means that all the representation is given to the coastal cities. Go a few miles inland, and no politician gives a rat's ass what happens, and the only way to get stuff done is via Federal lawsuits.
California needs to be broken up into multiple states, where at minimum, the inland region is separated from the coastal elites.
While this isn't entirely wrong, if you think that will solve the problem, you're kidding yourself. While agriculture wastes water on high-water crops like alfalfa, people on the coast aren't able to get water to keep green grass near their homes so that wildfires won't take out entire neighborhoods. Yet the coastal cities' politicians don't want to pay for desalination, which would be a municipal-level expense, not a state expense.
No, the fundamental problem is that we elect people who are in it for powe
Re: (Score:2)
Stop electing Democrats then. The state did a lot better with middle of the road people like Schwarzenegger.
Although I do vote "D" more often than not, I agree that he was a decent governor. And I agree in general that a moderate, whether there's a D or an R by that person's name, is likely to suck less than an extremist, whether on the left or the right.
The problem is:
Re: (Score:1)
That's difficult with Trump as a lead weight dooming Republican prospects in California. A middle-of-the-road Schwarzenegger type could win California, but only once we're in the post-Trump era.
Trump isn't the problem. He's a symptom of the problem.
The only reason Schwarzenegger was able to win a general election as a Republican is because he is largely pro-choice.
The only reason Schwarzenegger, as a pro-choice Republican, was even able to make it into a general election as a Republican is because recall elections don't involve a Republican Party primary.
Thus, Schwarzenegger proved incontrovertibly that California isn't fundamentally opposed to a Republican in general, but is fundamentally oppose
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure if you've experienced one of these California wild fires up close. The best thing you can do is remove tress close to your structure. The second best thing you can do is work on the structure, things like enclose the eves, finely screened vents, etc. Make the structure much harder to light up, move things that can light it up away.
People that have not experienced one of these fires up close fail to understand just how hot the environment can be. Things catch on fire from the heat alone, no direct f
Other fakes... (Score:2)
Not any more so, than "fake" sweaters — and other items of clothing made from synthetic yarns.
I don't like those either, but blaming the for whatever is wrong with "the environment", is silly.
Are all experiences similar? (Score:2)
We pulled out the grass in our front yard several years ago. We have never watered it even once, since the original motivation was to conserve water in a drought area. The only slight maintenance we've done was to blow the leaves off maybe once a year or less.
So, at least in our case, the claims of not dramatically reducing water usage, maintenance, and cost are very incorrect. Since we're in a drought area, bad chemical runoff during rain is limited since there isn't much rain. As for a limited lifespan, I
Yes (Score:2)
To help the environment, the only landscaping anyone should have is natural plants. No grass. No fertilizers. No pesticides. Get over the idea that the sterile green lawn is ideal cuz it aint. Astrotuf is made from oil. Fertilizers are made from oil. Pesticides are made from oil.
Re: (Score:2)
Bermuda Grass (Score:3)
When I lived in LA, part of our lawn was Bermuda Grass. Now, normally when Bermuda Grass is given its druthers, it spreads out flat like the weed that it is. Ugly when it does. But if you manage to keep it contained and satiated, the blades turn up, rather than laying flat, and you have the softest lawn I've ever encountered. It never gets very long, either. You could reasonably never mow it and thus not run into problems with the HOA, although it does look better when mowed. It doesn't take as much water as normal Fescue / Bluegrass / whathaveyou, and as a result, is more drought tolerant.
Just plant that stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
Burmuda works great for me. Drought resistant, it crowds out weeds, doesn't require a lot of mowing. It can handle a fair amount of foot traffic. Resistant to disease.
It does need a fair amount of sun and doesn't do well in shade.
Concrete and tarmac (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
A better alternative would be to put down a thick layer of mulch, pack it down a bit, and then cover it with bark (which you'll have to replace perhaps once a year, depending on use). The size of the pieces of bark is a matter of taste, but pieces a bit larger than pea gravel often works well. (It's a lot softer underfoot than rock are.)
Re: (Score:2)
Same with me. I have not seen an entire lawn from artificial turf, partially because it is expensive, and the local urban areas have ordinances in place, and I don't know how an entire lawn would survive a hard rain.
My preference is xeriscaping, where the lawn has a nice path, then plants around. That, or maybe fence things in and go for a front garden.
Kill your lawn (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Local plants are often a good choice, but it depends on your expected useage patterns. Cactus doesn't work well if you intend to frequently walk through the yard.
Re: Kill your lawn (Score:2)
One could ask oneself why bother living in a place where no plants can grow. To me, that's that place telling me people are not welcome there.
Where to get shade, cooling, fruits and vegetables, where to see birds and bees, if all there is is cactus and scorpions? That's nature telling us something really profound: GTFO.
That’s not what single use plastic it. (Score:2)
Single use plastic is plastic that you use briefly and then throw away. The term is not correctly applied to a material that is installed and remains in place for a decade.
It also doesn’t make sense to claim artificial lawns must contain PFAs.
Obviously if they can be washed, they must be draining water, and they are designed to do so. There is no chance that anyone washing their astroturf is using as much water as someone would use to water their lawn. That is just obviously false, and I see they have
Re: That’s not what single use plastic it. (Score:3)
"There is no chance that anyone washing their astroturf is using as much water as someone would use to water their lawn"
They absolutely could be if they are watering it to cool it down. Plants have proper perspiration. Astro turf does not.
Re: (Score:2)
It all depends- the article seems to be fixated on LA usage. I have a bit of it in my mid-western yard which is easily 20 years old. I picked it up from the local school which was replacing their football field. They trashed most of it and it was probably illegal for me to steal their trash... It doesn't look great but it's just fine. works well in areas where the grass doesn't grow.
If you want it to look perfect, and to perform perfectly then you probably do trash it every decade... therefore it should be
comparing virtues (Score:2)
I don't care if fake plastic lawns are "better" for the world or not.
Is this an actual problem? (Score:2)
I mean, are "millions of people" seriously doing this? And, if, so, is it just an LA issue? ... cuz I'm pretty sure I've never seen it outside of a stadium.
I have a grass (and weeds) lawn, here in Washington state. I don't water it. During our dry summers, it turns brown and looks dead... then it comes back in the fall when the rain starts again.
Or ... (Score:2)
...maybe don't live in the freakin' desert.
But, "perfect weather", you know.
Yes (Score:2)
I don't get it (Score:2)
What the difference between Fake Plastic Lawns and Real Plastic Lawns?
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention they seem confused about "single use plastic".
It's a lawn that's going to sit there for years...not a spoon you're throwing away immediately.
(That's not an argument for, or against....I really have no opinion)
Who cares? (Score:2)
Fake grass what? (Score:2)
In los angeles, you need a special permit to install a fake grass lawn...
cw
another "Paper Bag" problem (Score:2)
Now with these stupid lawns, LA county was literally paying people to put in astroturf. Whoops, our bad, now we think it's awful.
Just use native plants (Score:2)
In Arizona you don't see grass lawns. What you see is either sand or pebble lawns decorated with very large cacti. The cactus would even provide a delicious fruit every now and then.
In Seattle nobody would care as the grass would grow naturally.
However in a climate like California where it is naturally more like Arizona than Seattle, the choice of foreign grass lawns is absurd. Just use local flora, or better not have a lawn at all, and use that space to expand housing in new constructions (there is a housi