QUESTION FAKE GRASS in LGUSD.

Image from businessinsider.com Think installing plastic grass constitutes doing your part to respond to climate change?  Think again.   Trace that messaging back to its source.  The source is NOT  Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD).  The source is most likely an entity that profits  when you buy an artificial turf system... probably someone in the petroleum industry, plastics  industry , chemical  industry  or artificial turf industry.   The companies polluting the planet have spent millions to make you think carpooling and recycling will save us . These companies have also spent millions to make you think installing plastic grass will save us. If you have fallen under the spell of those that make money when you buy plastic grass, it's time to wake up.  Plastic grass is NOT an environmentally-responsible way to deal with drought . Our water district, SCVWD, like other districts throughout the state: promotes water conservation does NOT promote artificial turf SCVWD explains

Image from  Safe Healthy Playing Field 's  Facebook post . Marketing artificial turf as "recyclable" is greenwashing. Being "recyclable" and being "recycled" are not the same thing.  Artificial turf is classified as a single-use plastic .   While some single-use plastic water bottles may be recycled, artificial turf is  NOT being recycled in the U.S. It's challenging to separate the infill and contaminants from the carpet. There are no facilities in the U.S. that recycle artificial turf, and it's unlikely we're shipping it overseas.  Industry confirms in the video below that no artificial turf has EVER been recycled in the U.S.: 🟢👀🟢We spy something green...an industry greenwashing tactic! 🚩Artificial turf has long been touted as being recycled, giving communities a false sense of being good enviro stewards. 💀BUT @TenCateGrassUS admitted that NO artificial turf has EVER been recycled in the US. NONE. pic.twitter.com/Q8RTjoxEwZ — PFA

Image from   kidspriorityone.org The  Children’s Environmental Health Center of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai   cautions in its artificial turf consumer guide : "Beware of greenwashing: the use of terms like “organic”, “green”, and “Eco” do not guarantee safety. In fact, those terms are not regulated for turf products, so their meaning in this context is at best ambiguous."

Image from  forceofnatureclean.com In this educational seminar "Testing for Chemicals of Concern in Synthetic Turf" , David Teter ( the consultant LGUSD's landscape designer brought to the 11/8/21 LGUSD-hosted Town Hall to  assert the safety  of artificial turf ) concludes: "Organic infill products made from coconut fiber/peat and rice husks are inconsistent with regards to the leaching of heavy metals and SVOCs. Some of these organic infills leached more heavy metals (arsenic, cobalt, hexavalent chromium, lead, and nickel) and SVOCs than crumb rubber." LGUSD has eschewed crumb rubber in its proposed artificial turf system because of the widely-recognized concerns with it.  So how can LGUSD conclude plant-based infills are safe?