The environmental impact of actual grass that you keep cut is likely far worse. Preferably, grass lawns are banned generally. The expectation of keeping short grass maintained should die.
That’s a stupid false dichotomy. Why would those be the only options. Clover is a good low growing grass substitute. You can also grow native pants in most of the space so cutting isn’t required. There are many options that aren’t grass lawns that require a ton of maintenance.
You think if you told people they all had to get rid of their grass lawns heaps of them wouldn’t just replace them with a load of concrete if they didn’t want the maintenance? Enough people do it already without being forced to by a ban.
We’re in a thread about astro turfing lawns, so when you paraphrase “a kept lawn is likely worse for the environment”, what you are implying is that astroturfing a lawn is better for the environment than a real one. Which I think is a very bold statement to make.
That aside I do like the idea of things like clover lawns, but is that going to appeal to the sort of person that astroturfs their lawn because “muh dog shit and piss” or because they can’t be bothered to get the lawnmower out?
What’s the environmental impact of fake grass? Isn’t it better than real grass because it doesn’t need water or pesticides? (I don’t have a grass yard or lawn so I don’t know what upkeep a fake one entails. My neighbor has one in their backyard, which basically replaced dirt with a few patches of grass from the prior owner. We have concrete from our prior owner. )
A lawn needs neither of these things, or if you choose just to have plants instead (which we did in our small garden) then that needs neither water nor pesticides. Occasionally I might pull by hand some straggly stuff, or use a small electric strimmer to tidy things up (e.g. the garden path when stuff starts growing between the paving).
Unlike artificial grass, and even though my garden is small, this spring I had two birds nesting, I see quite a lot of bees and butterflies, and I just let the ants get on with doing their business. Pesticides and herbicides are never used. If there’s a plant I don’t want growing somewhere I can pull it up manually. There’s no need for the area to be super manicured.
I think fake grass looks absolutely shit and I don’t like the environmental impact but I don’t think that banning it is the solution.
Let’s see some incentives for people that keep their gardens wildlife and eco friendly like a council tax discount.
If we are going to ban petrol and diesel cars, and oil and gas boilers, we can certainly ban fake grass.
Tax the crap out of it, make it uneconomical for those who don’t need it.
“Only rich people should have fake grass” - you
I am curious as to why you think banning it isn’t a solution? Seems like a very obvious solution to me.
I just don’t like the idea of banning everything I don’t personally agree with.
I’d be the first to object if someone else wanted something I like banned just because they think it’s shit.
The environmental impact of actual grass that you keep cut is likely far worse. Preferably, grass lawns are banned generally. The expectation of keeping short grass maintained should die.
So you’d rather concrete jungle over lawns? I feel like if you banned grass lawns that’s what you’d get.
That’s a stupid false dichotomy. Why would those be the only options. Clover is a good low growing grass substitute. You can also grow native pants in most of the space so cutting isn’t required. There are many options that aren’t grass lawns that require a ton of maintenance.
You think if you told people they all had to get rid of their grass lawns heaps of them wouldn’t just replace them with a load of concrete if they didn’t want the maintenance? Enough people do it already without being forced to by a ban.
Sure, some would if that were the rule. How about we ban both. The option isn’t binary.
We’re in a thread about astro turfing lawns, so when you paraphrase “a kept lawn is likely worse for the environment”, what you are implying is that astroturfing a lawn is better for the environment than a real one. Which I think is a very bold statement to make.
That aside I do like the idea of things like clover lawns, but is that going to appeal to the sort of person that astroturfs their lawn because “muh dog shit and piss” or because they can’t be bothered to get the lawnmower out?
Astroturf does not require mowing.
What’s the environmental impact of fake grass? Isn’t it better than real grass because it doesn’t need water or pesticides? (I don’t have a grass yard or lawn so I don’t know what upkeep a fake one entails. My neighbor has one in their backyard, which basically replaced dirt with a few patches of grass from the prior owner. We have concrete from our prior owner. )
A lawn needs neither of these things, or if you choose just to have plants instead (which we did in our small garden) then that needs neither water nor pesticides. Occasionally I might pull by hand some straggly stuff, or use a small electric strimmer to tidy things up (e.g. the garden path when stuff starts growing between the paving).
Unlike artificial grass, and even though my garden is small, this spring I had two birds nesting, I see quite a lot of bees and butterflies, and I just let the ants get on with doing their business. Pesticides and herbicides are never used. If there’s a plant I don’t want growing somewhere I can pull it up manually. There’s no need for the area to be super manicured.
You don’t have to put pesticides on your grass you know you can just leave it.
It gets watered by the rain, and the rain falls on it regardless of if it’s real or fake or concrete. So it isn’t a waste.
Anyway it allows for drainage. One of the reasons we get so much flooding nowadays is because we’ve concreted over everything.