1

Brock Hoyt
Ecological Footprint Paper
March 10, 2016
Environmental Issues 4300
The Tennis Ball

2
Table of Contents
Abstract..3
The History Of The Tennis Ball And Its Production Elements..3-4
The Modern Day Manufacturing Process..4-6

Ball Specifics Lead To Over Production And A Higher Demand Of

Rubber..6-8

The Infamous Ecological Footprint Left By The Tennis Ball..8-9

The Environmental Impact of Rubber from Malaysia..9-11

The Environmental Impact Of Wool From New Zealand..11-12

A Human Derived Impact Calls For Repurposed Solutions..12-14

References..15

Appendix..16-18

Abstract
Since the late 1800s, tennis has become an increasingly popular
world sport among recreational players and competitors. However,
recent studies have shown an extensive ecological footprint from the
production of the tennis ball. Receiving supplies from 11 countries and
traveling a distance of over 50,000 miles, the tennis ball is responsible
for several tons of CO2 emissions and other greenhouse gases. The
most environmentally problematic materials are fresh latex from
Malaysia and wool from New Zealand. Malaysian rubber plantations,
used for the construction of the tennis balls core, have diminished the
land use of natural tropical forest and normal hydrologic responses.
New Zealand sheep farmers, responsible for the production of the
tennis balls wool fabric cover, have induced issues with air, water, and
land damage. Fortunately, recycling organizations and reuse
opportunities have cut down on the excessive disposal of a bad
tennis ball.
The History Of The Tennis Ball And Its Production Elements
Evolving from the original lawn tennis form in 1870, modern day
tennis is a sport thats widely played throughout the globe. The original
game, a match contest of two to four players, saw the back and forth
volleying of a ball over a net. The tennis ball, at the time, was
conventionally black or white depending on the color of the court. The

4
current fluorescent yellow color wasnt implemented until 1972, as
studies had shown this color was the easiest to see on a television
screen (ITF,2016). Distinctly different form todays conventional rubber
tennis ball, the original form consisted of a leather or cloth stitched
sphere. The ball was stuffed with rags or horsehair, which existed as
the standard core that provided bounce (ITF,2016). Overtime, the ball
saw several enhancing characteristics to reach its present from.
Charles Goodyear, the inventor of the tennis ball vulcanization process,
was the first to create a ball solely made of condensed rubber
(ITF,2016). Quickly developing, flannel stitching was added on top of
the rubber to address wearing features that the ball experienced. The
ball was also made hollow and pressurized to achieve bounce that
wasnt over excessive (ITF,2016).
The previous rubber core manufacturing process used a
technique called the Cover-Leaf. This process used a stamp to press
uncured rubber into a shape that resembles a three-leaf clover
(ITF,2016). According to the International Tennis Federation, the ball
was then assembled by specialized machinery, and a gas additive was
used to pressurize the core (ITF,2016). The Cover-Leaf process was
used for a period of time, but the aspiration for greater ball striking
consistency yielded the modern formation process. The compression of
two rubber half shells creates the current core, while the cloth over the
ball is special melton with vulcanized rubber seams (ITF,2016).

5
The Modern Day Manufacturing Process
The creation of the modern day tennis ball is manufactured in an
11-stage production. Images from this process can be seen in Figures
1-6 in the concluding appendix portion. The manufacturing of tennis
balls is primarily done in the Far East, as labor and production costs are
significantly less than former fabrication that was done in Europe and
the United States (ITF,2016). The first stage of the production deals
with raw rubber entering the factory in bales of that weight 70 to 250
pounds (ITF,2016). The rubber is thoroughly kneaded and sources of
powder are added that gives each ball the obligatory durability. The
rubber is then left to soak in a petroleum solvent (ITF,2016). The
second stage involves certain formulations of various chemicals by
strict proportioned weight. The additives from largest to smallest
quantities in this stage include: natural rubber, GPF black reinforcing
filler, clay, Zinc oxide, Sulfur, Diphenylguanidine, and Cyclohexyl
benthiazyl sulphenamide (ITF,2016). Stage three, described as
squeezing toothpaste from a tube, extrudes the rubber material
through an opening hole (ITF,2016). The rubber compound is then cut
into small pellets.
Stage four of the production process marks the recognizable
globular shape of a tennis ball. In stage four, the rubber pellets are
pressed at 150 degrees for about two and a half minutes. The press
forms perfect half-shells of the rubber formula, which are now ready to

6
be buffed in stage five (ITF,2016). The buffing of the half-shells edge in
stage five creates a slightly abraded surface. This roughened area is
then filled with a vulcanized solution to prepare for the full formation in
stage six. Stage six is the process of connecting two halves and
pressurizing the rubber core (ITF,2016). The inflation of this core can
be done in two distinct ways. The first way uses a chemical reaction
after the core is connected as one unit. The use of sodium nitrite and
ammonium chloride create nitrogen during a controlled molding
process (ITF,2016). The second option of inflation occurs before the
two half-shells are shaped. In a concentrated environment, compressed
air is introduced between the two pieces. A press sculpts the two ends
together, ultimately creating a pressurized core through trapped
compressed air (ITF,2016). Stage seven is another buffering step.
During this stage, the full core is slightly scratched and a coating of
rubber solution is applied (ITF,2016).
Upon completion of the constructed core, stage eight
implements the bright yellow fabric cover. The International Tennis
federation says there are two types of fabric cover that can be applied.
Needle cloth, containing a greater amount of synthetic fibers, is much
cheaper to produce (ITF,2016). The other fabric, Melton cloth, has
extremely high wool content. Rolls of fabric 150 feet long by 5 feet
wide are cut in dumbbell shapes that are referred to as blanks
(ITF,2016). The back of each blank is coated with the vulcanizing

7
rubber solution, and two blanks are used for the wrapping of one
individual ball. Stage nine is the final molding element (ITF,2016). The
ball, now with an overlaying fabric component, is placed into a heated
press. The heat from the press allows the bonding of the core and the
interior rubber coating of the fabric. This molding step is what creates
the visible exterior white seams (ITF,2016). Stage ten fluffs the cloth
with a tumbling through a steam laden. The final stage, step eleven, is
where balls are tested for performance and brand names are marked
(ITF,2016).
Ball Specifics Lead To Over Production And A Higher Demand Of Rubber
With the increasing popularity and desire to play the game of
tennis, a corresponding demand for tennis balls also ensues. To satisfy
the recreational and professional needs of the sport, 300 million balls
are produced each year (Wojtek,2011). The market is fairly competitive
and is dominated by nine major brands. These brands include
Slazenger, Prince, Tretorn, Volkl Tennis, Wilson, Gamma, Dunlop Sport,
Babolat, and Penn. The production of balls becomes problematic when
each company introduces a new series, with attempts to out due
others and satisfy intense standards. The Penn Tennis Company alone
has 18 different series of balls (USTA,2016). Each ball is tested under
conditions that include 68 degrees F, 60% humidity, and an
atmospheric pressure of 102 kPA (Wojtek,2011). Individual balls must
meet the standard diameter of 2.5-2.7 inches and weigh between 56-

8
59.4 grams (Wojtek,2011). The ITF also states regulatory bouncing
heights for each ball. After being dropped from 100 inches onto a
concrete floor, a ball must bounce between 53-58 inches (Good,2015).
This is generally achieved through a pressurized core around 12
pounds per square inch (Good,2015).
Tennis ball manufacturing also sees specialized forms of balls. A
regular duty ball is proper for indoors and clay courts (Stevetennis).
Extra duty balls are specifically designed for grass and concrete courts.
This ball was introduced to avoid the excessive fuzziness that clay
courts create. The last specialized form of a ball is for high altitude
regions. This type of ball is utilized because a regular ball would have a
bounce that surpasses the 58-inch standard (Wojtek,2011). The high
set of criteria put forth by the ITF results in negative consequences. An
over production of various ball series and types is unnecessary. The
quick disposal of a ball that doesnt reach benchmark goals is also
frequent. In both cases, the demand for raw rubber and other
resources increase. The amount of forested land use is consequently
replaced with heavily farmed rubber plantations.

The Infamous Ecological Footprint Left By The Tennis Ball

In a recent study by Mark Johnson, of Warwick Business School,
its suggested that the tennis ball has one of the longest production

9
journeys in the entire world. Johnsons study looked at the Slazenger
tennis ball used at the world famous Wimbledon Championships. His
analytical study discovered that these championship official balls travel
over 50,000 miles before they reach Slazengers production factory in
the Philippines (Carrington,2013). Various pollution and emissions are
released from the production and transportation process along the
way, all to simply achieve the most cost-effective standard. Johnsons
investigation showed that Slazenger balls go across 11 countries
worldwide for the required production materials (Carrington,2013). Figure
9 in the appendix maps the extensive journey. The path shows clay
shipped from South Carolina, magnesium carbonate from Japan, silica
from Greece, zinc oxide from Thailand, sulfur from south Korea, and
rubber from Malaysia (Carrington,2013). The fabric cloth covering the
tennis ball is shipped from New Zealand as wool to Stroud. The wool is
intertwined into felt and shipped back to Bataan in the Philippians for
ball assembly (Carrington,2013). Despite such an extensive footprint, an
environmental ignorance has allowed the formation of massive supply
chains like this. The tennis ball production is a prominent example of
how manufactures are avoiding environmental damage costs
(Carrington,2013). The most environmentally impactful elements in the
tennis ball production process are the farming of wool and natural
rubber, which will be examined in proceeding paragraphs.

10
The Environmental Impact of Rubber from Malaysia
The natural rubber that creates the core of a tennis ball
undergoes some of the most environmentally harmful activities.
Malaysian natural rubber is produced from rubber trees (Hevea
brasiliensis), and is one of Malaysias largest merchandises. The warm,
moist, and sunny climate conditions allow the tree to thrive and
provide almost twenty percent of the worlds natural rubber
(EWC,2016). Henry Wickham introduced the first rubber trees in 1877
as an attempt to increase harvesting activities. From the original 7.3
square miles of rubber trees, massive removals of natural forest and
jungle has cleared the way for 23,166 square miles that are being
farmed today (EWC,2016).
A study done by Malaysias northern neighbor, Thailand,
suggests that rubber tree plantations are productive for 13-18 years
(EWC,2016). A typical plantation lasts for 20-25 years, as fresh latex is
extracted from trees seven years and older. The taping of these mature
trees harvests fresh liquid latex. The latex is processed into three
primary forms including concentrated latex, block rubber, and ribbed
smoked sheet rubber (EWC,2016). The tennis ball cores utilize the
block rubber for its element of thickness. This study also yielded
results that show high quantities of greenhouse gasses that are
released from rubber plantation processes in both Thailand and
Malaysia. Fresh latex production is associated with the gas emissions

11
that include CO2, N2O, and CH4. Figure eight in the appendix outlines
the land conversion and diesel gas sources that are responsible for
these gas emissions (EWC,2016).
Its estimated that by 2050, rubber plantations in Malaysia will
potentially triple from current land use. The rubber farms will convert
landscapes away from evergreen broadleaf trees and other farming
practices (Envlreaserchweb, 2013). Not only does rubber production
affect forest systems and create high CO2 emissions, but another
study shows negative consequences for biodiversity (Envlreserchweb,
2013). When native tropical forests are replaced with rubber tree
farms, biodiversity significantly decreases from the area. High
concentrations of human activity on the farm, and degradation of
forest floor creates habitat thats not suitable for many species.
The study also highlights rubber plantation impacts on hydrology
components. A heavily forested area that is converted to rubber
plantation experiences significantly less land cover. This becomes an
issue during the wet season. Substantial amounts of rain will cause
flooding because natural filtration will be slower with the lack of dense
vegetation. Rubber planting can also cause land degradation with the
inability to naturally recharge groundwater (EWC,2016). Increased
water use for irrigation purposes during the dry season will create
droughts in surrounding streams (EWC,2016).

12
A comparative test was performed to understand water runoff
and soil erosion in tropical rainforests and rubber farming conditions. In
rainforest forest settings, water runoff was 99mm/ha/yr and soil
erosion was 63 kg/ha/yr (EWC,2016). When compared to rubber
plantations, water runoff was almost three times as high at 283
mm/ha/yr. The more astonishing statistic was the soil erosion values.
Rubber plantations experience soil erosion at levels 42 times higher
than tropical rainforests. Soil erosion was 2694 kg/ha/yr for rubber
plantations (EWC,2016). According to the East West Center, repetitive
cultivation on rubber farms increases the risk of landslides in hill
sloped regions (EWC,2016). Erosion has also lead to increased amounts
of sediment in streams around rubber plantations. However, improved
environmental awareness in the past several years is starting to shine
light on excessive greenhouse gas emissions and forest depletion from
the rubber farming industry.
The Environmental Impact Of Wool From New Zealand
A close second to the of farming of rubber, the wool industry in
New Zealand poses a significant environmental threat to the countrys
land, air, and water quality. An analysis done by PETA has shown
noteworthy atmospheric greenhouse gas composition from the manure
generated by livestock (PETA, 2014). In the United States alone,
methane gas has boosted by 130% due to animal gas. The wool for
tennis ball covers are harnessed from sheep that make up 90% of New

13
Zealands greenhouse gas sources (PETA, 2014). In attempts to reduce
this percentage, Ministers from New Zealands Agriculture and Climate
Change have proposed a tax on sheep farmers. This plan did dont
pass (PETA, 2014).
Along with air emissions, heavy sheep farming also poses an
equal threat to land damage and water pollution. A study performed by
Oxford shows that heavily live stocked land will cause vegetation to
change and increase the amount of soil erosion in the area. The over
farming of Sheep is a huge problem in New Zealand, as there are even
specialized farms for the wool covered tennis ball used at Wimbledon.
New Zealand should pay carful attention to excessive sheep farming,
as areas like Patagonia, Argentina have land use thats now 93 percent
susceptible to erosion (PETA).
A water hazard is also potential do to large quantities of fecal
coliform contaminant from the livestock farms. A study by the New
Zealand government on two medium-sized sheep farms found fecal
contamination in water that that exceeds safe drinking and
recreational uses (PETA, 2014). These readings have been apparent
every year since the study started in 1994. The New Zealand sheep
also have a toxic chemical dip that is applied to kill any lurking
parasites. The data shows that 40% of facilities that use this dip pose a
threat to water contamination. A large fish kill in 1995 found a toxic
synthetic, pyrethriod cypermethrin, responsible for the kill. This

14
synthetic was said to be a compound that was present in the sheep-dip
that was used by a local sheep farm (PETA, 2014).
A Human Derived Impact Calls For Repurposed Solutions
With increasing awareness surrounding the environmental
impact that the tennis ball has, many organizations and companies are
generating creative solutions. Project Green Ball, a team consisting of
Scott and Ben Soloway, discovered a way to effectively recycle
200,000 used tennis balls. Partnering with IGK Equestrian, the father
and son team had balls grinded up and used as equestrian turf
(EWC,2016). Similar to Project Green Ball, France is implementing
similar strategies to cope with the 14 million balls they use each year.
After a ball reaches the end of its lifecycle, France has created
programs to grind up the balls and reuse them in durable multipurpose surfaces. Its assessed that 40,00 balls can provide a 100
square foot surface for educational, medical, and childrens facilities
(EWC,2016).

Penn Tennis Company is also making excellent strides

to minimize the overuse of natural rubber. According to their website,

Penn is able to recapture the dust particles they use during the buffing
stages of production. An estimated two million tennis balls each year
are created from the recaptured dust, lowing the demand for new
rubber product (EWC,2016). Penn also has established a donating
program that gives balls that are used or didnt reach standards to
schools and rehabilitation centers (EWC,2016). Wilson Tennis is making

15
similar advances, and say there use of recycled material is projected to
reduce 330,000 pounds of landfill waste (EWC,2016).
The program ReBounce is another committed organization to the
reuse of tennis balls. ReBounce offers a Green Tennis Machine, which
helps re-pressurize balls back to their original bounce. The program is
effectively saving clients around 50% on practice ball budgets
(EWC,2016).
Tennis balls reuse is also being looked at for craft projects,
animal toys, and various home uses. Simply using Google and typing
ways to reuse tennis balls will give hundreds of links with imaginative
solutions. The Green Services website offered 43 ideas including
making ornaments, chairs, camera tripods, massage rolling devices,
and much more. The old balls can also serve as functional purposes
including reducing clothe drying time, acting as a piggy bank, and
reducing the sticking of walkers (EWC,2016).
The East West Center also proposed a very practical solution to
save natural forest land use. Increasing the nature reserves and paying
upland farmers could help minimize the amount of land taken by
rubber plantations. Decreasing the amount of operable plantation land
could save biodiversity and ecologically important tropical forests
(EWC,2016).

16

References
Carrington, D. (2013, June). Wimbledon tennis balls travel over 50,000 miles to arrive at
centre court. In The Guardian . Retrieved March 12, 2016, from

17
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/damian-carringtonblog/2013/jun/26/wimbledon-tennis-balls-miles-centre-court
Good, L. (2015, June). What Are Tennis Balls Made Out Of?. In Live Strong . Retrieved
March 11, 2016, from http://www.livestrong.com/article/355925-what-are-tennis-ballsmade-out-of/
History of the tennis Ball (2016). In International Tennis Federation . Retrieved March
13, 2016.
2012 USTA Approved Tennis Balls (2016). In USTA . Retrieved March 9, 2016, from
https://www.usta.com/CoachesOrganizers/Information/2012_usta_approved_tennis_balls/
RUBBER PLANTATIONS MAY HAVE DEVASTATING ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS IN THE UPLANDS OF MAINLAND SOUTHEAST ASIA, SCIENTISTS
WARN (2016). In East West Center . Retrieved March 13, 2016, from
http://www.eastwestcenter.org/news-center/east-west-wire/rubber-plantations-may-havedevastating-environmental-effects-in-the-uplands-of-mainland-southeast-as
Wojtek, K. (2011, October 5). All About Tennis Balls . In Steve Tennis . Retrieved March
8, 2016, from http://www.stevegtennis.com/2011/10/all-you-ever-wanted-to-know-abouttennis-balls

Appendix
Images From the Tennis Ball Production Process

18

Figure 1: Stage 3 (Compound Extrude)

Figure 2: Stage 4 (Shell Formation)

Figure 3: Stage 5(Edge Buffer Additive)

Figure 4: Stage 6 (Ball Formation and Inflation)

Figure 5: Stage 7 (Core Buffer Solution)

19

Figure 6: Stage 8 (Fabric Cover Addition)

Figure 7: Stage 10 (Finished Product After Steaming)

Figure 8: Emissions associated with Malaysia Rubber Plantations

20

Figure 9: Tennis Ball Production Journey For Balls Used in Wimbledons

Tournament