Weaknesses of the Current Arrangements
There are a number of aspects of the current EOL tyre management regime that we consider are not working well:
- there is considerable illegal dumping of tyres
- the increasing tendency for landfills to require tyres to be shredded before being placed in landfills is increasing the cost of disposing of tyres and may have the effect of reducing the number of tyres that are disposed of properly
- large number of tyres are stored in private piles (with no controls over their management)
- current controls are insufficient and councils are facing enforcement problems
- potentially commercially viable recycling options face unnecessary difficulties
- a range of parties is being subject to high financial costs
- a potentially valuable resource may not be used as efficiently as possible.
Each of these weaknesses is discussed in more detail in the sections below.
Dumping of tyres
Our discussions with council staff indicate that the illegal dumping of tyres on both private and public land is a significant problem. In the Auckland and Waikato regions it also appears to be a growing problem. Several recent examples of illegal dumping that we have become aware of through our discussions with councils are summarised below:
North Auckland property
- Up to 8000 tyres were dumped on a privately owned rural property.
- The owner 'staked out' the property and caught an operator dumping 250 tyres. He also took photos.
- The operator was required to remove the 250 tyres and pay $100 reparation. But because there was proof of his dumping only the most recent 250 tyres, the operator was not required to remove any of the tyres that had been dumped previously.
- The estimated cost to the owner of removing the tyres exceeds $8000.
- The council has refused to pay for removal of the tyres and is threatening to prosecute the owner if he does not do so.
West Auckland property
- A property owner let his land to a mechanic who stored 10,000 tyres without the owner's consent.
- The tenant subsequently closed his business and broke the lease, but left the tyres.
- The landowner has not been able to legally require the tenant to remove the tyres, and faces costs of around $10,000 to have them removed at his expense.
Mt Wellington property
- 60,000 tyres were dumped at a disused army barracks.
- There was no evidence on who dumped the tyres, so the cost of removing them fell to the landowner.
Hamilton property
- 80,000 tyres were recently dumped on a Waikato property over the course of a single weekend.
- At the time of writing there is no evidence about who dumped the tyres.
The need for proof is proving a key weakness in prosecuting dumpers of tyres under the Litter Act. To date, operators appear to have found it relatively straightforward to dump tyres without being observed, by using uninhabited properties and dumping tyres at night. And as noted above, even when the owner of a North Auckland property caught a dumper of tyres 'red handed', the dumper was required to remove only the single truckload of tyres he was caught physically dumping. In other words the courts took the view that proof of the dumping of each and every load of tyres was required.
This problem is exacerbated by the low level of fines involved. Even when dumpers are caught and prosecuted, the fines levied on them are low relative to the transport, processing and landfill costs that would be incurred if the tyres were disposed of properly. Combined with the low likelihood of being caught, these low fines provide a relatively strong incentive for less scrupulous operators to dump tyres, rather than have them disposed of properly.
Increased cost for storing tyres in authorised landfills
The requirement to shred or quarter tyres before placing them in landfills is making it more expensive to dispose of tyres properly. (MfE's discussions with tyre recyclers suggests that the cost of collecting and shredding tyres, transporting them to a landfill, and paying the relevant landfill costs, is in the order of $1.50-$2.00 per tyre.)
The evidence we have seen supports the shift towards requiring tyres to be shredded. However, the potential for the resulting cost increase to encourage operators to dump tyres, or store them in private piles, needs to be taken into account. Specifically, it means that a more rigorous regulatory regime is likely to be needed.
Inadequate arrangements for private tyre piles
Some of the council staff we talked to also suggested that operators are increasingly storing tyres on their own land, or on another party's land with the owner's consent. As far as we can determine it is legal for operators to do this so long as they comply with the general legislative controls discussed earlier in this paper.
At present levels, the environmental impact of these private tyre piles generally appears to be manageable: fire risk and unsightliness are the key problems associated with them and have been the focus of council concerns and activity to date. However, the practice is likely to become more of a concern if the numbers or size of the piles increase.
With larger piles, the risk of fires will become increasingly high unless mechanisms are put in place to ensure that the piles are designed and managed properly. As noted above, local authorities have the right to place controls on the establishment of tyre piles under their district plans. However, to date no councils appear to have done this.
Insufficient controls
While district plans or bylaws have the potential to be an effective mechanism for controlling the location and management of tyre piles, they are not yet being used by councils for this purpose. Accordingly, where councils are concerned with the placement or size of a particular pile, they are being forced to use other legislative provisions to require landowners to remove or modify their tyre piles. To date, the RMA appears to be the mechanism most frequently used. But as noted previously, the RMA is directly relevant only where the creation of a tyre pile has involved another activity, such as earth works, which require consent.
Until a clear and enforceable set of controls relating to tyre piles exist in all jurisdictions where they present a problem, councils will inevitably continue to face challenge when attempting to control tyre piles.
Enforcement difficulties
In addition to the lack of clear controls on tyre piles, tyre dumping is causing enforcement difficulties for councils. Both Auckland and Waikato local authorities have suffered instances where landowners subject to an abatement order have paid to have the tyres removed, but the tyres have simply been dumped somewhere else in the region. As a result, councils can become engaged in a series of enforcement and legal disputes over the same pile of tyres.
Moreover, landowners that have had tyres dumped on their property without permission sometimes resist the responsibility for removing the tyres. This makes enforcement more contentious and costly.
Accordingly, until the problem of tyre dumping is resolved, councils are unlikely to be able to enforce the legislative and regulatory requirements that are in place, even if those requirements have been strengthened.
Costs
The current EOL tyre regime is placing significant costs on:
- landowners who have had tyres dumped on their properties
- local and regional councils (through increased legal costs; the costs of dealing with the effects of tyre fires; paying to have tyres removed where nobody else can be found to do so; and removing tyres dumped on council-owned land)
- fire authorities and the fire service, when they are called to extinguish tyre fires.
We have not been able to estimate the overall national level of these costs in a robust way. But evidence provided by Councils on specific instances in the Waikato region is available, and provides a useful indication of the magnitudes involved.
Tyre fires
- The recent tyre fire in Waikato (which took
16 hours to put out) cost:
- DOC $45,000 to extinguish the fire (acting as the rural fire authority for that area)
- Environment Waikato $31,000 to collect the oil discharged and prosecute the site operator for the water and air discharges
- the Waikato District Council $14,000 to deal with the effects on the local population (including temporary accommodation for 10 families).
- Significantly bigger tyre piles exist in the Waikato region so a future fire could involve significantly higher costs.
Tyre removal and associated legal costs
- The failure of Rubber Technologies (a firm set up to shred and recycle tyres, that went into receivership with large piles of tyres on a number of properties) cost the Waikato District Council $22,000 in staff costs and an additional $23,000 in legal costs.
- Retrieving tyres from rivers, reserves and public land cost Auckland City Council $28,000 in 2002/03.
- Removing tyres that had been illegally dumped on their property:
- cost a landowner in the Hamilton region $100,000
- cost two Auckland landowners - $8000 and $10,000 respectively.
A very rough way of seeing how these figures could convert into an overall national cost is to calculate the number of tyres that are likely to be being dumped or stored in private piles each year. J&J Laughton is the only significant shredder in the Auckland and Waikato regions. He is currently shredding about 500,000 tyres per year.[MfE file note from discussions with Jim Laughton, 28 June 2002.] But the region is currently likely to be producing about 1.5-2 million tyres per year.
This suggests that the number of tyres being illegally dumped or stored in piles on private land in the Auckland and Waikato regions runs well into the hundreds of thousands. As most of the examples above relate to piles of 10,000 - 20,000, the overall cost of dealing with hundreds of thousands of dumped tyres, or privately stored tyre piles, could easily run into the millions of dollars.
Increased recycling difficulties
Before EOL tyres can be re-used or recycled, they have to be transported to the location they are needed in, and transformed into an appropriate state. For example, before rubber products can be made out of tyres, they must often be shred into crumbs of an appropriate size, and have the non-rubber components removed. Supply of a sufficient level must also be secured.
If the management regime for EOL tyres were working more effectively, the majority of tyres would be transformed to at least some degree and being placed in landfills. Accordingly, a potential recycler would find it easier to identify and collect tyres, and wouldn't have to transform them to the same degree. Accordingly they would face reduced cost. Similarly, with more tyres being placed in landfills, it would be easier for potential recyclers to secure a sufficient level of supply.
Accordingly improving the current regime should at least marginally improve the viability of potential recycling options.
Waste of a potential resource
Where EOL tyres are dumped or placed in landfills, they are clearly seen as waste products by those responsible for them. But this does not mean that EOL tyres have no resource value. Rather it means that the cost of securing that potential resource is not economic at current prices and given current institutional arrangements.
It has been clearly established internationally that tyres have a range of potential uses:
- re-treading
- a fuel source:
- tyres have a high energy content compared with other wastes and fossil fuels (they have a higher calorific value per tonne than coal and almost 70% of the calorific value of crude oil) [Tyres in the Environment, Figure 4.5.]
- they have been used internationally to fuel cement kilns and power stations
- landfill engineering
- transforming into other rubber products
- granulated rubber surfaces (play areas, sports fields, running tracks)
- road surfacing materials
- engineering uses
- recovery of constituent parts/materials
[Tyres in the Environment, Figure 4.8.]
- steel 14%; gas 22%; carbon 41%; oil 23%.
Looking at this from a financial perspective, an Australian study [Joint Working Group Tyres submission to the EPHC discussion paper, page 4.] estimated that the materials for the initial construction for a new tyre cost at A$2000-A$2500 per tonne, and that the production of coarse crumb can recover A$200-A$500 per tonne of value from tyres. They estimate superfine crumb can recover up to A$1000 per tonne.
Accordingly it is important for the Government to remain cognisant of the fact that tyres have potential resource value, and to implement any policy changes that, at reasonable cost, would make it more cost-effective to retrieve the resource value in tyres that are currently being discarded.
