Comment
In 2011, it was reported that over 50% of UK houses still contained asbestos, despite a ban on asbestos products in November 1999; and that was five year’s ahead of the EU schedule. Now there appears to be a new threat to public health that is being similarly ‘stonewalled’; and it is being used widely in the turfcare, leisure and landscaping industries. I am referring to rubber crumb, a bi-product of vehicle tyres that is used extensively in modern synthetic surfaces as an infill, as soft fall in playgrounds and for various landscaping projects. When Messrs Elbert, Wright and Faria
patented AstroTurf in 1965, the way was ‘paved’ for artificial turf to gain a significant place in sport. It was seen as a clear alternative to natural turf, with less maintenance being an attractive option, along with a consistent playing surface. Scroll forward fifty years and many variants
Rubber crumb or, as the Americans like to call it, crumb rubber
“
of synthetic turf are available - the product has certainly taken hold in the marketplace. So much so that the RFU and the FA are planning to install the latest technology across England in a series of training facilities and ‘3G hubs’. There are even domestic variants available for lawns and gardens. The manufacturers and installers claim that
A crumbled tyre is still a tyre and remains toxic, regardless of where you put it
the product offers: - lower maintenance costs - a more consistent playing surface - less risk of serious injury - increased revenue The arguments against include: - of no benefit to the environment - heat stress for players - increased risk of serious injury - carpet type friction burns - respiratory problems from the infill - carcinogenic properties of the infill It is the last two points that I want to
concentrate on, and the similarities between rubber crumb and asbestos are quite frightening.
Like asbestos, rubber is a naturally occurring product which, in its normal state, poses no threat to human health. When extracted and moulded, it can provide a number of useful products, not least car tyres. It has long been known that tyre
production factories have reported a “higher than normal” rate of respiratory problems and cancers amongst their workers. As with asbestos, increased ventilation and extraction was seen as the obvious antidote. Municipalities and local authorities across
the world have long struggled to dispose of old tyres in an environmentally friendly manner, so it must have come as some relief to them when the rubber crumb bi-product was created. Over forty of the US states, and the HSE
(Health & Safety Executive) here in the UK, have banned the disposal of tyres into landfill because, in part, of their toxicity. But, as one observer noted; “a crumbled tyre is still a tyre and remains toxic, regardless of where you put it.” So, is there any research being undertaken
into the health risks posed by rubber crumb or, as our American cousins like to call it, crumb rubber? Well, yes, plenty. Most of it in the USA who
were, incidentally, the first country to eventually ban the use of asbestos. A report by Environmental and Human
Health Inc (EHH) cited studies at the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment, which identified the following chemicals in rubber crumb:
- Benzothiazole - a skin and eye irritation that is harmful if swallowed
- Butylated hydroxyanisole - a recognised carcinogen, suspected endocrine toxicant, gastrointestinal toxicant, immunotoxicant, neurotoxicant, skin and sense-organ toxicant
- n-hexadecane: a severe irritant
- (t-octyl) phenol: corrosive and destructive to mucous membranes
The study also detected metals that were
Carpet burns, infection and increased risk of injuries are already well documented. Now cancer should be added to the list of concerns over 3G surfaces
14 I PC FEBRUARY/MARCH 2016
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148