To the editor:

The referendum on the ballot this election for the prospect of an artificial turf field is concerning for many reasons, but the issue I want to highlight is recycling.

These fields are comprised of plastics. We know pollution from these materials cause harm to humans and the environment. For years the oil industry pushed a false narrative that recycling was the solution. Unfortunately, we now know (and they knew all along) that recycling is largely ineffective.

Despite the rhetoric in vendors’ marketing materials, there is no proper recycling for artificial turf. “Recycling” often means repurposing old turf, which postpones the problem. Most artificial turf eventually ends up in landfills or is burned. Actual recycling is ineffective given the complex composition of artificial turf, and is not being done at scale within the US. And for reference, the materials used in a typical field are equivalent to around one million plastic bottles.

If we are to even consider these fields, then I would expect the town to provide case studies showing how other installations are being properly recycled. But since we don’t have any proof that legitimate recycling is possible, then it’s an easy choice to vote no on 9 and 10.

Brock Allen

Barrington