LITA ECO Ultra Thick Cut to Length vs SeeGreen 5 ft. W X 7 ft. L Green Polypropylene Astroturf: which is safer?
LITA ECO Ultra Thick Cut to Length is our pick: better on PFAS and on the overall hazard picture.
Our pick
AstroTurf
LITA ECO Ultra Thick Cut to Length
PFAS grade
Overall grade
Verdict
Hazard flags
Material
Confidence
PossiblePFAS in backing or adhesives
ReportedMicroplastic shedding from fibers
PossibleLeaching from backing polymers or adhesives
AstroTurf
SeeGreen 5 ft. W X 7 ft. L Green Polypropylene Astroturf
PFAS grade
Overall grade
Verdict
Hazard flags
Material
Confidence
PossibleVOC off-gassing from polyurethane or latex adhesive
LikelyPolypropylene UV degradation and microplastic shedding
ReportedBacking adhesive failure and fiber separation
Where these two actually differ
- We flag PFAS in backing or adhesives, Microplastic shedding from fibers, Leaching from backing polymers or adhesives and Infill contamination (if sand or crumb used) on the AstroTurf and not on the AstroTurf.
- We flag VOC off-gassing from polyurethane or latex adhesive, Polypropylene UV degradation and microplastic shedding, Backing adhesive failure and fiber separation and Infill contamination (if rubber granules used) on the AstroTurf and not on the AstroTurf.
- The AstroTurf is Synthetic turf fibers (polyethylene/polypropylene backing) where the AstroTurf is Polypropylene (PP) astroturf, which is most of the difference in these two grades.
- These two are level, close enough that price and fit should decide it rather than our grade.
- We are less certain about the AstroTurf grade, at 45% confidence against 72%, because it discloses less.
Both products run through the same public rubric: materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls, plus a beyond-PFAS hazard analysis. Grades are model-based estimates, not lab tests. How grades work →
More artificial turf: see the full ranking