Pathway to domestic natural rubber production: a cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment of the first guayule automobile tire manufactured in the United States

  • Pragnya L. ErankiEmail author
  • Amy E. Landis



Guayule (Parthenium argentatum) is a perennial shrub that can be cultivated in the Southwestern US. It produces natural rubber that could be a viable substitute for Hevea natural rubber and synthetic rubbers currently used in tires. Drivers for producing domestic guayule rubber include fluctuations in price and availability of imported Hevea rubber. A tire was manufactured in 2017 where guayule rubber was substituted for all of the Hevea and synthetic rubber in the conventional tire.


Life cycle assessment (LCA) from cradle to grave was used to evaluate the environmental and energy sustainability of the guayule tire, and these metrics were benchmarked against those of the conventional tire (CT). Functional units of 1 kg natural rubber for agricultural processes, as well as 1 tire for the cradle-to-grave study were considered. Life cycle inventory (LCI) data were collected directly from primary sources, including guayule field experiments, a rubber-processing company, and a major tire manufacturer. Scenario analysis was used to evaluate alternative processes, such as irrigation options in guayule cultivation, processing scale in rubber extraction, and selection of allocation methodology in LCAs. Model uncertainty was characterized using Monte Carlo analysis.

Results and discussion

The LC energy consumption of the guayule tire (GT) was 13.7 GJ/tire (including co-product credits, excluding C sequestration during agriculture), compared to 16.4 GJ/tire for the CT. The GT had 6–30% lower emissions than CT in ten different environmental impact categories. Bagasse co-product in energy applications showed benefits of reducing energy consumption by 10% and decreasing environmental impacts by up to 11%. GT’s use-phase resulted in the highest energy consumption (95%) and environmental impacts ranging between 81 and 99%. Variables in use phase, i.e., rolling resistance coefficient, vehicle efficiency, and tire lifetime, and those in guayule cultivation i.e., rubber and biomass yields, were key model parameters. The effect of excluded but potentially important model parameters, i.e., guayule carbon sequestration and resin co-product were tested via sensitivity analyses.


Based on these results that factored in the lower rolling resistance coefficient of a guayule tire—a significant element that improves the fuel economy of an automobile—the guayule rubber tire shows promise in its ability to replace current conventional tires. The first commercially manufactured guayule rubber passenger tire will most likely substitute components, which are either partially or fully guayule, instead of guayule replacing 100% of the existing rubbers as shown in this study.


Environmental impacts Guayule Hevea Life cycle analysis (LCA) Passenger tire Natural rubber 



Arid Land Agricultural Research Center


Acidification potential


Conventional tire


Cooper Tire and Rubber Company




Eutrophication potential




Fossil fuel depletion


Guayule rubber tire


Guayule tire


Global warming potential


Human health carcinogenics


Human health non-carcinogenics


Human health respiratory effects


Life cycle assessment


Life cycle inventory


Life cycle impact assessment


Monte Carlo analysis


Product Category Rule


Tire-derived fuels



The authors would like to thank team members at Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, USDA ALARC, and PanAridus. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the USDA, Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, and PanAridus.

Funding information

This work was supported by the Biomass Research and Development Initiative (BRDI) grant (USDA-NIFA 2012-10006-19391 OH).

Supplementary material

11367_2018_1572_MOESM1_ESM.docx (840 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 840 kb)


  1. Azarabadi H, Eranki PL, Landis AE (2017) Life cycle impacts of commercial guayule rubber production estimated from batch-scale operation data. Int J Environ Sustain 13(3):15–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Balsiger J, Bahdon J, Whiteman A (2000) The utilization, processing and demand for rubberwood as a source of wood supply (Forestry Policy and Planning Division)Google Scholar
  3. Bare J (2011) TRACI 2.0: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts 2.0. Clean Technol Environ 13:687–696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boateng AA, Mullen CA, Goldberg NM, Hicks KB, McMahan CM, Whalen MC, Cornish K (2009) Energy-dense liquid fuel intermediates by pyrolysis of guayule (Parthenium argentatum) shrub and bagasse. Fuel 88:2207–2215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boustani A, Sahni S, Gutowski T, Graves S (2010) Tire remanufacturing and energy savings, Environmentally Benign Manufacturing Laboratory, Sloan School of Management, MITEIGoogle Scholar
  6. Bras B, Cobert A (2011) Life-cycle environmental impact of Michelin Tweel® tire for passenger vehicles. SAE Int J Passeng Cars-Mech Syst 4:32–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ciroth, Winter S (2014) openLCA 1.4 overview and first steps. GreenDelta, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  8. Cole WM, Hilton AS, Schloman WW, Compton JB, Dembek JA Jr (1991) Guayule rubber project: final report prepared under contract no. 53-3142-7-6005. Bridgestone/Firestone Inc., AkronGoogle Scholar
  9. Cornish K, Schloman WW (2002) Rubber, guayule. Encyclopedia of Polymer Science and Technology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., HobokenGoogle Scholar
  10. Corti A, Lombardi L (2004) End life tyres: alternative final disposal processes compared by LCA. Energy 29:2089–2108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. da Hora J, Tavares B, Mesquita de Macedo D, Weingart Barreto R, Evans HC, Reis Mattos CR, Maffia LA, Mizubuti ESG (2014) Erasing the past: a new identity for the Damoclean pathogen causing South American leaf blight of rubber. PLoS One 9:e104750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davis B (2017) '2015 was strong year for U.S. tire industry'. Tire Business Accessed Oct, 2018
  13. Elgowainy A, Dieffenthaler D, Sokolov V, Sabbisetti R, Cooney C, Anjum A (2013) GREET. net Software. Argonne National Lab, ArgonneGoogle Scholar
  14. EPA (2008) Liquefied petroleum gas combustion. Clearinghouse for Inventories and Emissions Factors (CHIEF) Accesed Oct 2018
  15. Eranki PL, El-Shikha D, Hunsaker DJ, Bronson KF, Landis AE (2017) A comparative life cycle assessment of flood and drip irrigation for guayule rubber production using experimental field data. Ind Crop Prod 99:97–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Estilai A, Ray DT (1991) Genetics, cytogenetics, and breeding of guayule. Guayule Natural Rubber. A Technical Publication with Emphasis on Recent Findings, pp 47–92Google Scholar
  17. Feraldi R, Cashman S, Huff M, Raahauge L (2013) Comparative LCA of treatment options for US scrap tires: material recycling and tire-derived fuel combustion. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:613–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fet AM, Skaar C (2006) Eco-labeling, product category rules and certification procedures based on ISO 14025 requirements. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11:49–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fiksel J, Bakshi BR, Baral A, Guerra E, DeQuervain B (2011) Comparative life cycle assessment of beneficial applications for scrap tires. Clean Technol Environ Pol 13(1):19–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Finkbeiner M, Inaba A, Tan R, Christiansen K, Klüppel H-J (2006) The new international standards for life cycle assessment: ISO 14040 and ISO 14044. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11:80–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Foster KE, Wright N, Fansler SF (1991) Guayule natural rubber commercialization: a scale-up feasibility study. Office of Arid Lands Studies, University of Arizona, TucsonGoogle Scholar
  22. Franklin Associates Report (2010) Comparative life cycle assessment of two options for scrap tire treatment: material recycling vs. tire-derived fuel combustion. In: Genan Business and DevelopmentGoogle Scholar
  23. Huijbregts MAJ, Norris G, Bretz R, Ciroth A, Maurice B, von Bahr B, Weidema B, de Beaufort ASH (2001) Framework for modelling data uncertainty in life cycle inventories. Int J Life Cycle Asses 6:127–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Huijbregts MAJ, Gilijamse W, Ragas AMJ, Reijnders L (2003) Evaluating uncertainty in environmental life-cycle assessment. A case study comparing two insulation options for a Dutch one-family dwelling. Environ Sci Technol 37:2600–2608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. IHS Markit (2014) Chemical Economics Handbook: Natural Rubber. Accessed Oct 2018
  26. International Organization for Standardization (2006) ISO 14040:2006, Environmental management—lifecycle assessment—principles and framework. Geneva, Switzerland, p 20Google Scholar
  27. Jawjit W, Kroeze C, Rattanapan S (2010) Greenhouse gas emissions from rubber industry in Thailand. J Clean Prod 18:403–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Krömer S, Kreipe E, Reichenbach D, Stark R (1999) Life cycle assessment of a car tire. Continental, Hannover, Germany. Accessed Oct 2018
  29. Kroschwitz JI, Mark HF (2004) Encyclopedia of polymer science and technology. John Wiley & Sons, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  30. Krukanont P, Prasertsan S (2004) Geographical distribution of biomass and potential sites of rubber wood fired power plants in Southern Thailand. Biomass Bioenergy 26:47–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lemus R, Lal R (2005) Bioenergy crops and carbon sequestration. CRC Crit Rev Plant Sci 24:1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lieberei R (2007) South American leaf blight of the rubber tree (Hevea spp.): new steps in plant domestication using physiological features and molecular markers. Ann Bot 100:1125–1142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lo S-C, Ma H-W, Lo S-L (2005) Quantifying and reducing uncertainty in life cycle assessment using the Bayesian Monte Carlo method. Sci Total Environ 340:23–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mann C (2015) "Why we (still) can’t live without rubber." In: National Geographic MagazineGoogle Scholar
  35. Mi J, Liu W, Yang W, Yan J, Li J, Sang T (2014) Carbon sequestration by Miscanthus energy crops plantations in a broad range semi-arid marginal land in China. Sci Total Environ 496:373–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Miller SA, Landis AE, Theis TL (2006) Use of Monte Carlo analysis to characterize nitrogen fluxes in agroecosystems. Environ Sci Technol 40:2324–2332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Morris D (2014) How leaf blight could destroy the global economy. Fortune. Accessed Oct 2018
  38. Nakayama FS (2005) Guayule future development. Ind Crop Prod 22:3–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nakayama FS, Vinyard SH, Chow P, Bajwa DS, Youngquist JA, Muehl JH, Krzysik AM (2001) Guayule as a wood preservative. Ind Crop Prod 14:105–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Nakayama F, Holt G, Coffelt T, Vinyard S, Faber AL (2003) Pellet fuel from guayule plant material. Association for the Advancement of Industrial Crops Annual Meeting Program and Abstracts, Portland, Oregon, p 62Google Scholar
  41. OEC (2016) 'Natural rubber trade', The Observatory of Economic Complexity (OEC), Accessed Oct 2018
  42. Palisade (2015) User’s guide TopRank: what-if analysis add-in for Microsoft® excel. Version 7. Ithaca, NYGoogle Scholar
  43. Palisade (2016) User’s guide @RISK: risk analysis and simulation add-in for Microsoft® Excel. Version 7.5. Ithaca, NYGoogle Scholar
  44. Petsri S, Chidthaisong A, Pumijumnong N, Wachrinrat C (2013) Greenhouse gas emissions and carbon stock changes in rubber tree plantations in Thailand from 1990 to 2004. J Clean Prod 52:61–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pré Consultants B.V (2001) Life cycle assessment of an average European car tyre', Commissioned by The European Car Tyre Manufacturers, BLIC. Third party report, 23Google Scholar
  46. Priyadarshan PM (2011) Biology of Hevea rubber. CABI, Wallingford, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  47. Rasutis D, Soratana K, McMahan C, Landis AE (2015) A sustainability review of domestic rubber from the guayule plant. Ind Crop Prod 70:383–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Ratnasingam J, Ioras F, Wenming L (2011) Sustainability of the rubberwood sector in Malaysia. Not Bot Horti Agrobot Cluj-Na 39:305Google Scholar
  49. Ray DT, Coffelt TA, Dierig DA (2005) Breeding guayule for commercial production. Ind Crop Prod 22:15–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. RMA (2014) 2013 US scrap tire management summary. In:, edited by Rubber Manufacturers Association. Washington DC
  51. Sheehan J, Camobreco V, Duffield J, Graboski M, Shapouri H (1998) Life cycle inventory of biodiesel and petroleum diesel for use in an urban bus. Final report. In: Other Information: Supercedes report DE98005500; PBD: May 1998; PBD: 1 May 1998, Medium: ED; Size, 315 pagesGoogle Scholar
  52. Siler DJ, Cornish K, Hamilton RG (1996) Absence of cross-reactivity of IgE antibodies from subjects allergic to Hevea brasiliensis latex with a new source of natural rubber latex from guayule (Parthenium argentatum). J Allergy Clin Immunol 98:895–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Teoh YP, Don MM, Ujang S (2011) Assessment of the properties, utilization, and preservation of rubberwood (Hevea brasiliensis): a case study in Malaysia. J Wood Sci 57:255–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. UL. Environment Standard (2015) Product category rules for tires to prepare EPDs. The International EPD system. Accessed Oct 2018
  55. Weidema BP, Bauer Ch, Hischier R, Mutel Ch, Nemecek T, Reinhard J, Vadenbo CO, Wernet G (2013) 'The ecoinvent database: Overview and methodology, Data quality guideline for the ecoinvent database version 3′,
  56. Zan CS, Fyles JW, Girouard P, Samson RA (2001) Carbon sequestration in perennial bioenergy, annual corn and uncultivated systems in southern Quebec. Agric Ecosyst Environ 86:135–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringColorado School of MinesGoldenUSA

Personalised recommendations