![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
tiger_spotI have here a flyer that came in the mail today. It offers to replace my messy biological lawn with pet friendly, maintenance free FieldTurf, the world's leading synthetic turf system. The main argument seems to be that this will let me save on water bills, with some secondary arguments around tidiness and lessened effort in things like mowing.
(Had I a messy biological lawn, I would replace it with a strategic mix of native wildflowers. Coincidentally, this would involve saving on water bills and not mowing, and also not cover the earth with green plastic.)
(Had I a messy biological lawn, I would replace it with a strategic mix of native wildflowers. Coincidentally, this would involve saving on water bills and not mowing, and also not cover the earth with green plastic.)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-11-19 09:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-21 11:28 am (UTC)Agent Weasel's school has a patch of astroturf because the place concerned is bounded on three sides by two-storey buildings and on the fourth by a high fence, and they wanted a softer surface for the children to play on than concrete. They'd tried to grow grass there and failed miserably due to the lack of light.
Now, that kind of use makes sense to me. Replacing healthy, growing grass with it? Or healthy, ecologically-sound xeriscaping? Not so much.