Measuring environmental value for Natural Lawn and Garden Care practices

Abstract

Background, Aims and Scope

Measuring Environmental Value for Natural Lawn and Garden Care Practices provides a life cycle assessment and impacts valuation methodology to quantify environmental (public health and ecological) and water conservation benefits from natural lawn and garden care practices in Seattle. Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) initiated this study as part of a triple-bottom-line analysis of its Natural Lawn and Garden Care program.

Methods

The study uses life cycle assessment (LCA) methods, including the Carnegie-Mellon Economic Input-Output Life Cycle Assessment (EIOLCA) tool publicly available on the Internet, to inventory pollutant generation from a synthetic nutrients and pesticide approach to lawn and garden care compared against a natural/organic care approach. The study applies US Environmental Protection Agency’s TRACI (Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and other environmental Impacts) climate change, acidification, eutrophication, and human health-criteria air pollutant stressor factors, along with the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory’s CalTOX risk assessment model’s human and ecosystem toxicity potentials to roll up the numerous pollutant quantities into six environmental impact categories (global warming potential, human respiratory disease potential, human toxicity potential, ecological toxicity potential, acidification potential and eutrophication potential). The study develops cost valuation estimates for each impact category to produce a dollar estimate of the environmental cost of the two archetypical lawn and garden care methods.

Results

Lawns and gardens account for 25% of Seattle’s land area, so lawn and garden care methods potentially have substantial impacts on the city’s land-and water-based ecosystems. LCA methods provide an informative methodology for comparing environmental impacts from lawn and garden care practices. These methods reveal the importance of more natural lawn and garden care practices. They also show that resource extraction and manufacturing impacts of pesticides and synthetic fertilizers dominate their on site use impacts in the case of global warming, but that the reverse holds for human and ecological toxicity, and eutrophication. In addition, releases of particulates, SOx and NOx associated with gasoline-powered lawn mowing are nearly an order of magnitude larger than releases of these pollutants as a result of the production of pesticides and fertilizers.

Discussion

The study proceeds by using available data and research to build a desktop model that characterizes and contrasts two archetypical lawn and garden care practices: (1) Petroleum-based fertilizers and pesticides, a gasoline-powered lawn mower, and substantial irrigation to maintain a traditional weed-free, always-green lawn and garden, versus (2) A backyard compost system to provide lawn and garden nutrients, supplemented moderately by purchased non-synthetic soil amendments, an electricity-powered mower, no pesticides, and drought tolerant lawn and garden species having little need for irrigation.

Conclusions

The study concludes that each household converting from synthetic to natural practices produces nearly $75 in annual ongoing public health, ecological, water conservation and hazardous waste management benefits — between $16 and $21 of environmental benefits from reduced use of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, $8 of environmental benefits for switching from gas to electricity for lawn mowing, $42 in cost savings due to reduced irrigation, and $5 or $6 from lower hazardous waste management costs. There also is a potential one time avoidance of $31 in construction costs resulting from reduced need for storm water detention and diversion capacity.

Recommendations and Perspectives

This study’s estimates of environmental value would benefit from comprehensive information on direct exposure to active ingredients in insecticides during their application. Estimates of impacts are based only on volatilization and runoff of active ingredients after application. Furthermore, the study would benefit from estimates of carbon sequestration in soils promoted by natural lawn and garden care techniques, and on the upstream pollutant releases from production of synthetic versus organic fertilizers. All three of these data gaps suggest that the estimated $75 per single family residence for environmental value is probably a lower bound on benefits from natural lawn and garden care versus more traditional pesticide-and-synthetic-fertilizer-based approaches.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Banzhaf HS, Desvousges WH, Johnson FR (1996): Assessing the externalities of electricity generation in the Midwest. Resource and Energy Economics 18, 395–421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bormann EH, Balmori D, Geballe GT (2001): Redesigning the American Lawn: A Search for Environmental Harmony (second edition). Yale University Press, New Haven, CT

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bare JC, Norris GA, Pennington DW, McKone T (2003): TRACI — Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts. J Indust Ecol 6, 49–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bowman DC, Devitt DA, Miller WW (1995): The Effect of Salinity on Nitrate Leaching from Turfgrass. USGA Green Section Record Jan/Feb 1995, 45–49

  5. Chen W, Hertl P, Chen S, Tierney D (2002): A Pesticide Surface Water Mobility Index and Its Relationship with Concentrations in Agricultural Drainage Watersheds. Environl Toxicol Chem 21, 298–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cooper RJ, Clark JM, Murphy KC (1995): Volatilization and Dislodgeable Residues Are Important Avenues of Pesticide Fate. USGA Green Section Record Jan/Feb 1995, 19–22

  7. Curran MA et al. (2002): BEES 2.0, Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability: Peer Review Report. NISTIR 6865, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dutilh, CE, Koudijs E (1998): Aquatic Ecotoxicity for Common Crop Protection Aids. Int J LCA 3(4) 200–202

    Google Scholar 

  9. Geisler, G, Hellweg S, Hungerbühler K (2005): Uncertainty Analysis in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): Case Study on Plant-Protection Products and Implications for Decision Making. Int J LCA 10(3) 184–192

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Haith DA (2001): TurfPQ, A Pesticide Runoff Model for Turf. J Environ Qual 30, 1033–1039

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kenna MI (1995): What Happens to Pesticides Applied to Golf Courses? USGA Green Section Record Jan/Feb 1995, pp 1–9

  12. Kovach J, Petzoldt C, Degni J, Tette J (1992): A Method to Measure the Environmental Impact of Pesticides. Integrated Pest Management Program Cornell University, New York State Agricultural Experimentation Station, Geneva, NY (Available through Online Publications of the New York State IPM Program at http://www.nysipm.cornell.edu/publications)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lippiatt BC (2002): Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability (BEES) Technical Manual and User Guide. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Technology Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  14. McDonald DK (1999): Ecologically Sound Lawn Care for the Pacific Northwest: Findings from the Scientific Literature and Recommendations from Turf Professionals. Seattle Public Utilities, Seattle, WA

    Google Scholar 

  15. Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (1996): Order Establishing Environmental Cost Values. Docket No. E-999/CI-93-583 (December 16, 1996), St. Paul, MN

  16. Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (2001): Order Updating Externality Values and Authorizing Comment Periods on CO2, PM2.5, and Application of Externality Values to Power Purchases. Docket No. E-999/CI-00-1636 (May 3, 2001), St. Paul, MN

  17. Muller K, Trolove M, James TK, Rahman A (2002): Herbicide Runoff Studies in an Arable Soil Under Simulated Rainfall. New Zealand Plant Protection 55, 172–176

    Google Scholar 

  18. Nielson L, Smith CL (2005): Influences on Residential Yard Care and Water Quality: Tualatin Watershed, Oregon. J Am Water Res Assoc Feb 2005, 93–106

  19. Petrovic AM (1995): The Impact of Soil Type and Precipitation on Pesticide and Nutrient Leaching from Fairway Turf. USGA Green Section Record Jan/Feb 1995, 38–41

  20. Rice G, Hammitt JK (2005): Economic Valuation of Human Health Benefits of Controlling Mercury Emissions from U.S. Coal-Fired Power Plants. Prepared for Northeast States Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) by the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis, Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  21. Schueler TR, Holland HK (eds) (2000): The Practice of Watershed Protection: Techniques for Protecting and Restoring Urban Watersheds. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, Maryland

    Google Scholar 

  22. Sivaraman D, Lindner AS (2004): A Comparative Life Cycle Analysis of Gasoline-, Battery-, and Electricity-Powered Lawn Mowers. Environ Engrg Sci 21, 768–785

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Smith A (1995): Potential Movement of Pesticides Following Application to Golf Courses. USGA Green Section Record Jan/Feb 1995, 13–14

  24. Starrett SK, Christians NE (1995): Nitrogen and Phosphorous Fate When Applied to Turfgrass in Golf Course Fairway Condition. USGA Green Section Record Jan/Feb, 23–25

  25. Toffel MW, Marshall JD (2004): Improving Environmental Performance Assessment — A Comparative Analysis of Weighting Methods Used to Evaluate Chemical Release Inventories. J Indust Ecol 8(1–2) 143–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis (2002): Series CA34 Average wage per job for 2002. Washington, DC

  27. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development (2002a): Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts (TRACI): User’s Guide and System Documentation. EPA-600-R-02-052, August 2002, Washington, DC

  28. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development (2002b): Economic Analysis of the Final Revisions to the National Polutant Discharge Elimination System Regulation and the Effluent Guidelines for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations. EPA-812-R-03-002, December 2002, Washington, DC

  29. Waterfall PH (1998): Harvesting Rainwater for Landscape Use. University of Arizona Cooperative Extension, Tucson, AZ

    Google Scholar 

  30. Yates MV (1995): The Fate of Pesticides and Fertilizers in a Turfgrass Environment. USGA Green Section Record Jan/Feb, 10–12

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeffrey Morris.

Additional information

ESS-Submission Editor: Mary Ann Curran (curran.maryann@epa.gov)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Morris, J., Bagby, J. Measuring environmental value for Natural Lawn and Garden Care practices. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13, 226–234 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1065/lca2007.07.350

Download citation

Keywords

  • Environmental externalities valuation
  • lawn and garden care
  • life cycle assessment
  • organic fertilizers
  • pesticides
  • synthetic fertilizers
  • water conservation