r\ ~r s '-" auoe;lation 

The Rubber Manufacturers Association 

Meeting with the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Climate Change 

Division 

June3,2015 

RMA Tire Company Members 

B RID6ESTODE 

PASSION for £XCELLENCE 

(9ntinental ~ 

...... c::.__ 

CDDPERTu-:lZEJ 

- liiAELLij 

TOVOTIREs· 

driven to perform 

~YYOKOHAMA 

6/3/2015 

1 
I 

RUBBER 

manufacturers ••aocili1.1on 

Overview 

• EPA's continued recognition of the biogenic or 

natural rubber fraction in tires 

• Benefits and use of natural rubber in tire 

manufacturing 

• Scrap Tire Markets- Tire Derived Fuel (TDF) 

• States with Utility Boilers currently combust TDF 

• States that support the use of biomass as a means 

to comply with the proposed Carbon Pollution 

Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: 

Electric Utility Generating Units ("Clean Power 

Plan") 

• RMA recommendations 

RMA Supports EPA's Recognition of the Natural 

Rubber Fraction in Tires 

Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule 

3 

• EPA's technical support document for the GHG reporting 

rule recognized the natural rubber fraction in tires as 

biogenic 

- http://www.epa.gov/qhqreportinq/documents/pdf/201 0 

/MRR-Revisions TSD.pdf 

• This background document included information from 

RMA's website that specified that passenger tires are 

14% natural rubber and truck tires are 27% natural 

rubber (RMA has updated the natural rubber content 

data) 

4 

6/3/2015 

2 
Q RUBBER 

manufacturers 

~~=~=·· ~----------------------

RMA Supports EPA's Recognition of the Natural 

Rubber Fraction in Tires 

GHG Deferral Rule 

Examples of biogenic C02 emissions include: "C02 from combustion of the 

biological fraction of tire-derived fuel" 

- Deferral for C02 Emissions from Bioenergy and Other Biogenic Sources under 

the Prel'ention ofSignificmll Deterioration (PSD) and Title V Programs: Final 

R11le (Page I 7 of I 04) 

Accounting Framework for Biogenic C02 Emissions (2011) 

"Tire-Deril'ed Wastes (TDW). Scrap tires have multiple uses, including use as a 

feedstock for TOW. Tires contain a biogenic component in the form of natural 

rubber or biomass, which comprises approximately 20 percent of the tire based 

on information collected from the Rubber Manufacturers Association (EPA, 

2010e). TOW is typically treated through combustion. TOW is often co-fired 

with other fuels, but may also be the primary fuel." 

- Accounting Framell'orkfor Biogenic C02 Emissions from Stationary Sources 

(September2011. Page 49of140) 

ORUBBER 

manufacturers 

-1--~·=~·~ ------------------------------------------------

RMA Supports EPA's Recognition of the Natural 

Rubber Fraction in Tires 

Framework for Assessing Biogenic C02 Emissions from Stationary Sources 

(20 14) 

Appendix N. Assessing Emissions from Waste-Derived Biogenic 

Feedstocks 

5 

- "Although MSW consists mainly of biogenic resources such as food, 

paper, and wood products, it also includes resources derived from fossil 

fue ls, such as tires and plastics. 

- After the MSW is delivered to a stationary source facility, it is 

incinerated in an EGU either "as is" (mass bum without recovery of 

recyclables), as refuse-derived fuel (bum after recyclables have been 

recovered), or combustion with energy recovery of source separated 

materials in MSW (e.g., wood pallets and tire-derived fuel; EPA, 

2009b). 

6 

6/3/2015 

3 
rers a11001UGn 

RMA Supports EPA's Recognition of the Natural 

Rubber Fraction in Tires 

Framework for Assessing Biogenic C02 Emissions from Stationary 

Sources (Continued) 

• Appendix N. Assessing Emissions from Waste-Derived Biogenic 

Feedstocks 

- "Tires contain a biogenic component in the fo rm of natural 

rubber. 

- Whole tires (including steel, etc.) from the combined grouping 

of passenger vehicles and trucks are, on average, composed of 

28% natural n1bber (Rubber Manufacturers Association, 

unpublished data 20 13). 

- Tire-deri ved-fuel is used in cement kilns, utility boilers, pulp and 

paper mills, industrial boilers, and dedicated scrap tire-to-energy 

fac ilities (EPA 2009b ). " (Page 29 of 98) 1 

~rers a-"OO.Itton 

RMA Supports EPA's Recognition of the Natural 

Rubber Fraction in Tires 

Janet G. McCabe, Memorandum - Addressing Biogenic Carbon 

Dioxide Emissions from Stationary Sources (November 19, 

2014) 

• Some states will wish to include biogenic feedstocks in their 

compli ance plans for the Clean Power Plan 

• When considering state compliance plans, the agency expects 

to recogni ze the biogenic C02 emissions and climate policy 

benefits of waste-derived and certain forest-derived industrial 

byproduct feedstocks 

- TDF is included in the category of Waste-Derived 

Feedstocks 

8 

6/3/2015 

4 
RUBBm 

manufact~:ue s I MOCllt:JOn 

Use and Benefits of natural rubber in 

tire manufacturing 

• The use of natural rubber in tires reduces 

the use of synthetic rubber and extraction 

of fossil fuels 

• Natural rubber provides performance 

characteristics in tires 

~ rors I.UOC&.Itlon 

Use and Benefits of natural rubber in 

tire manufacturing 

Sales weighted 

Average 

Passengerlfruck Composite 

Tire lfire (Passenger 

% natural % natural and Truck) 

rubber rubber % natural 

rubber 

19o/c 33o/c 24% 

6/3/2015 

9 

10 

5 
Use and Benefits of natural rubber in 

tire manufacturing 

• GHG emissions from the combustion of whole 

tires and Tire Derived Fuel (TDF) chips, which 

contain natural rubber, have a positive net effect 

on the carbon cycle: 

- Natural rubber is a renewable raw material in 

tires 

-Harvesting natural rubber does not destroy the 

source of the organic material 

- Producing natural rubber requires very low 

energy consumption 

O RUBBER 

manufacturers 

--

Use and Benefits of natural rubber in 

tire manufacturing 

11 

- Combustion of whole tires and TDF chips reduces 

atmospheric C02 levels when compared to traditional 

fossil fuels because they contain natural rubber which 

is biomass, produced by sequestration of C02 

through photosynthesis in rubber trees 

- There is no time lapse between emissions of C02 

from the natural rubber in TDF and the 

resequestration of the emissions from biomass 

regeneration because the source of the biogenic 

material is not destroyed 

12 

6/ 3/ 2015 

6 
rers Utoeiltion 

Tire Derived Fuel (TDF) 

• About 95 percent of annually generated 

scrap tires in the U.S. go to end use 

markets 

• Tire Derived Fuel (TDF) is the oldest and 

most mature market for scrap tires in the 

country 

• The combustion of end-of-life tires 

supplements or displaces the use of 

traditional fossil fuels 

Whole Tires and TDF Chips 

• 2 different products 

13 

• GHG emissions from the combustion of 

the biogenic fraction of whole tires is 

different from the GHG emissions from the 

combustion of the biogenic fraction of TDF 

Chips 

14 

6/3/2015 

7 
£'\ 

~ rers auoel.ltion 

TDF Chips 

• The majority of the wire in whole tires is 

removed 

• 30°/o of the total weight of the tire is 

removed 

• TDF chips contain a greater percentage of 

natural rubber based on weight than whole 

tires 

U.S. Scrap Tire Trends 2005- 2013 s.ooo 

4,SOO 

4,000 

3.500 

~ 3.000 

0 

~ 2.500 

; 

~ 2,000 

l,SOO 

1,000 

500 -

0 

2005 

- 120% 

2007 2009 2011 2013 

- Total to Market - Total Generated Market% 

15 

C Rubber Manufacturers Association, 2014. May not bo usod, reproduced or cited without proper attribution. 16 

6/3/2015 

8 
~.000 

4,500 

U.S. Scrap Tire Market Trends 

2005-2013 

Total= 4,105.79 Tot•l = 4,391.05 4,000 t-

. m. ~ 

c 

),500 

~ ] ,(l)() 

0 

~ l.SOO 

~ 

g 2,000 

~ 1,500 

1.000 

500 

lOGS 

• n rr•Ornvf'd (uti 

• hporttd 

2001 

• Grovnd Rubbf'r 

• S.k-d Tlr(1./m•rk.tt 

lOO'l 

u~TirH" 

[IKtrk Ate rurn.act 

lOll 

• CMI [ nclnurlna 

o\arkullur•l 

1.90 • L91 

7. 10 

6~ ~~ 

Tot•l • 3,666.85 

201) 

• U8 

-~~ 

a RKI•rn•Uon Pfoi«U 

• Punt~d/ St•mped 

Ple•w nott ~ RMA. btco~n tnck&nc tltts tull-td ftom K"P tht coll«<t-ot~ e-nte-r inc dOf'M~Ic: u\4'CI pn~nctt •nd lcht uu<:k used tire rn•rke" In 2009. 

RMAth."'Ced th•w-.y 11 lft(Ot"pof'at«< ntimo~tnof tirtt tnttelt!luwd tirt rmrltetsbflWHn 2009 .1nd 2011. tn 2009. RMAinc:lucHd uwd llfttno~ 

nwrket f01 .KJ•ptlrei In 2011 1.nd lOU, RMA s.ubtr~ttoduwdtltnftom the tot.4.1 hr~h.a"U&t-d ouku~tetotAint-t .apt i• tc~r•don 

C> Rubber Manufacturers Association, 2014. May not bo used, reproduced or cited without proper attribution. 17 

U.S. Scrap Tire Disposition 2013 

(percent of total tons generated annually) 

Numbers may not add due to rounding. 

«> Rubber Manufacturers Association, 2014. May not be used, reproduced or cited without proper attribution. 18 

6/3/2015 

9 
U.S. Tire-Derived Fuel Markets 2013 

Did y ou know? 

Total scrap tires 

diverted to TDF market: 

2,120,300 tons or 

almost 130 million tires 

e Rubbor Manufacturers Association, 2014. May not be used, reproduced or cited without proper attribution. 19 

U.S. Scrap Tire Market Summary (2005- 2013) 

552.51 789.09 1354.17 1093.50 975.00 

Land Disposed 590.81 593.98 653.38 491.65 327.78 

Exported 111.99 102.08 102.10 302.48 245.84 

Ovil Engineering 639.99 561.56 284.92 294.99 172.00 

Reclamation Projects UNK 132.58 130.00 54.29 49.17 

EleC1ric Arc Furnace 18.88 27.14 27.10 65.55 65.56 

Baled Tires/market UNK UNK 27.76 1.92 30.00 

Agricultural 47.59 7.13 7.10 7.10 7.10 

Punched/ Stamped 100.51 1.85 1.90 1.90 1.90 

Baled/no market 42.22 9.31 15.57 32.78 No data 

Used Tires I 

n/a n/a 371.25 n/a n/a 

Total to Market 3616.11 4105.79 4391.05 3083.76 3666.85 

Generated' 4410.73 4595.72 5170.50 3781.00 3824. 26 

% to Market/Utilized 82.0% 89.3% 84.9% 81.6% 95.9% 

% Managed 96.3% 102.5% 97.9% 95.4% 104.5% 

(oncludoOI bol<d and t.ndf~l<d tltHI 

llMA bepn ~ tira culed from KnP W• coatc:tkln ~tMnc domtostic uwd Pf'JMf'Ct' lftd Iicht tnd.IIMd tlfe fNtltU il\ 2009. RMA 

c:hqed dw wr; itlnc:ofporatl'd nc.lm.ltnof th:l enleflnc UMd tire m..w\ets bt1WHn 2009 and 201L In 2009, 1tMA ~ vs.ed tiri'S u a 

matbl for scr-.ptit"- '"2011 and 2013. RMAsubt1KttduMd Urn from tbt lotelt.lrt"'~ toc:ala,Utetotei Mt saaptir•Ctntiation. 1

RMA ch•nced the basis for reportmc Knp tJre ceneuttd annu•Dv from st•tt--ptovldfd da111n 20()5..2007 to • ulculattOn o f rtJ)I.(""tnt 

markt·t rlrts sokt •nd vchkte\ Kr•ppe-d In 2009. 201 1 and lOU. 

e Rubbor Manufacturers Association, 2014. May not be used, reproduced or cited without proper attribution. 20 

6/3/2015 

10 
U.S. Scrap Tire Disposition 2013 

M•rket or Disposition Thouunds of Tons Millions of Tires % chanae 2011·2013 

nre·Derlved Fuel 2120.29 129.37 48.6% 

Cement Kilns 726.04 44.30 137.7% 

Pulp & Paper 716.25 43.70 20.8% 

Electric Utilities 576.25 35.16 260.2% 

Industrial Boilers 0.00 0.00 ·100.0% 

Dedicated Tires-to-Energy 101.75 6.21 ·50.0% 

Ground Rubber 975.00 59.49 -10.8% 

Civil Engineering 172.00 10.49 ·41.7% 

Exported 245.84 15.00 · 18.7% 

Electric Arc Furnace 65.56 4.00 0.0% 

Reclamation Projects 49.17 3.00 ·9.4% 

Agricultural 7.10 0.43 0.0% 

Baled llres/market 30.00 1.83 1462.2% 

Punched/ Stamped 1.90 0.12 0.0% 

Total to Market 3666.85 223.74 12.9% 

Generated 3824.26 233.34 1.1% 

% to Market/Utilized 95.9% 95.9% 11.6% 

land Disposed 327.78 20.00 ·33.3% 

Baiedlno market 0.00 ·100.0% 

% Managed 104.5% 104.5% 4.7% 

{Includes Mar•tt'1, Baled and landfill) 

® Rubber Manufocturors Association, 2014. May not bo usod, reproduced or cited without propor attribution. 

U.S. Scrap Tire Generation 2013 

Tire Class Millions of Tires Market% Average Weight 

Weight (lbs) lthouoondsoftons) 

Light Duty Tires 240.5 

Pusencer tire repl~eements I 

199.3 I lllht truck tiro ~C4menu 28.0 

' nres from sc~pped c~n 13.2 

Commercial Tires 28.3 

Med•um. wkfe bue. huvy truck 

r•pllum.nt ,,,.,. 1 15.7 

nres from scrapped trucks and buses' U .6 

Total tires hauled 268.8 

Used tires culled 35.5 

Net scrap tires 233.3 

89.5% 

74.1% 

10.4% 

4.9% 

10.5% 

S.S% 

4.7% 

100.0% 

13.2% 

22.5 

120.0 

32.8 

32.8 

1

Foctbook 2014: U.S. nro Shlprntnt/Aa!Yitv RtPO<t IO< StaUIIIul YurlOll, Ru~r M.\nufacturon Anod•!lon. 

2705.5 

1700.4 

4405.8 

581.6 

3824.3 

1 

W~rd's Motor Vthldc fMts JOO RrurM 2014. tndu~s. the toUI numM-t o f vth4dts rt:mo~ from sot:Mce In 2013. tn 20U, W~rd't dJd 

not publls.hwhidcs. retired from s.ef'Vicet~r;~tedfor the Q r Jnd tludc/tM,Is.atqory. lns:tc;~d, it onlypubl:i$hcodtotafvel\ldes wapped 

from serviCit, RMA t1Um1tt'd the q)ii1 betw"een an .and truckl/bu\.C\ N\.e-<1 on 0\.t .avtQ&e of the split from 1002 • lOll AnumH two 

tirH wuppcod from l•aht duty vehidn .Jnd l..S tlrH sa~~ hom trvcb •nd bu~ 

21 

@Rubber Manufacturers Association, 2014. May not bo usod, reproduced or c ited without propor attribution. 22 

6/3/2015 

11 
RlJBBER 

manufacturers association 

TDF Usage by State Utility Boilers 

EPA Region TDF Usage (tons per year in 

2013) 

Region 3 and Region 4 289,000 

(Pennsylvania, North 

Carolina, Kentucky, Florida 

Region 5 (Michigan, Illinois, 119,000 

Wisconsin) 

Region 7 (Iowa, Missouri) 45,000 

ORUBBCR 

manufacturers 

~--~ .. ~-~; ~--------------------------------------------- State Comments on Biomass and the 

Clean Power Plan 

• States should be able to usc biomass to comply with the Clean Power 

Plan. 

- Eleven states: Arkansas, Connecticut, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Kansas, 

Maine, Michigan, New llampshire, Tennessee, and Wisconsin. 

23 

• EPA should clarify whether states can usc biomass in their compliance 

plans. 

- Seventeen states: Arkansas, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, 

Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, New Hampshire, North 

Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wisconsin. 

• If biomass cannot be included in plans, EPA should adjust green house 

gas reduction targets. 

- Six st:ucs: Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, and Wisconsin. 

24 

• Conclusion: Seventeen states would like the option to usc biomass. 

6/3/2015 

12 
£\ rers ""' eatoelttlon 

RMA Recommendations 

• RMA supports the policy determination in the 

McCabe memo which allows states to rely on 

biomass obtained from waste-derived 

feedstocks, including TDF, for compliance with 

the Clean Power Plan 

• RMA recommends that EPA include this policy 

determination in the Federal Implementation 

Plan for the Clean Power Plan 

I£\ rers I ""' .. aoc~tion 

Thank you 

Sarah Amick 

samick@rma.org 

(202) 682-4836 

Tracey Norberg 

tnorberg@rma.org 

(202) 682-4839 

6/3/2015 

25 

26 

13