Jämförelse av alternativa fyllnadsmaterial till konstgräsplaner

Sammanfattning: The use of artificial football pitches have expanded rapidly in recent years due to its substantial benefits over natural grass fields. Increased playing hours and decreased maintenance costs are often cited as the main benefits, but to achieve necessary performance rubber infill material is used. The environmental impact of this rubber infill has been studied, the migration of rubber infill granules was determined as Swedens second largest source of microplastic emissions (Magnusson K. et al, 2015). To circumvent the problems caused by rubber infill, alternative infill materials has been considered as a solution. This study aims to evaluate and compare several alternative infill materials already present on the market. The comparison is based on ten separate criteria. To gather the information needed for evaluation contact has been made with producers and industry experts, coupled with GC-MS and XRF analysis of three materials included in the comparison. The results found that at least three different alternative infill materials were more environmentally friendly, equal in play performance and comparable economically to EPDM rubber infill: Envirofill (Acrylic-coated sand), Safeshell (Walnut) and Geofill (Coconut-cork mix).