Environmental performances of production and land application of sludge-based phosphate fertilizers-a life cycle assessment case study.
Life cycle assessment
Mineral phosphate fertilizers
Phosphorus recovery
Sludge-based phosphate fertilizers
Struvite
Journal
Environmental science and pollution research international
ISSN: 1614-7499
Titre abrégé: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9441769
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2020
Jan 2020
Historique:
received:
09
07
2019
accepted:
29
10
2019
pubmed:
28
11
2019
medline:
10
4
2020
entrez:
28
11
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Phosphorus (P) is a non-renewable resource extracted from phosphate rock to produce agricultural fertilizers. Since P is essential for life, it is important to preserve this resource and explore alternative sources of P to reduce its criticality. This study aimed to assess whether fertilizing with sludge-based phosphate fertilizers (SBPF) can be a suitable alternative to doing so with fertilizers produced from phosphate rock. Environmental impacts of production and land application of SBPF from four recovery processes were compared to those of two reference scenarios: triple super phosphate (TSP) and sewage sludge. To avoid bias when comparing scenarios, part of the environmental burden of wastewater treatment is allocated to sludge production. The CML-IA method was used to perform life cycle impact assessment. Results highlighted that production and land application of SBPF had higher environmental impacts than those of TSP due to the large amounts of energy and reactants needed to recover P, especially when sludge had a low P concentration. Certain environmental impacts of production and land application of sewage sludge were similar to those of SBPF. Sensitivity analysis conducted for cropping systems highlighted variability in potential application rates of sewage sludge or SBPF. Finally, because they contain lower contents of heavy metals than sewage sludge or TSP, SBPF are of great interest, but they require more mineral fertilizers to supplement their fertilization than sewage sludge. Thus, SBPF have advantages and disadvantages that need to be considered, since they may influence their use within fertilization practices.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31773534
doi: 10.1007/s11356-019-06910-4
pii: 10.1007/s11356-019-06910-4
doi:
Substances chimiques
Fertilizers
0
Metals, Heavy
0
Phosphates
0
Sewage
0
Phosphorus
27YLU75U4W
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2054-2070Références
Waste Manag. 2015 Nov;45:391-9
pubmed: 25792438
Environ Pollut. 2016 Dec;219:1021-1035
pubmed: 27481645
Sci Total Environ. 2016 Nov 15;571:522-42
pubmed: 27453138
Water Res. 2015 Jun 15;77:35-48
pubmed: 25839834
Water Res. 2013 Oct 1;47(15):5480-92
pubmed: 23969400
Water Res. 2004 Nov;38(19):4222-46
pubmed: 15491670
Water Res. 2015 Nov 1;84:99-111
pubmed: 26218463
Environ Technol. 2016;37(11):1398-407
pubmed: 26786893
Water Res. 2001 Jan;35(1):151-9
pubmed: 11257869
Sci Total Environ. 2019 Mar 15;656:55-69
pubmed: 30502735
Environ Technol. 2017 Jun;38(11):1399-1407
pubmed: 27628209
Plant Physiol Biochem. 2007 Jan;45(1):47-53
pubmed: 17303432
Environ Sci Technol. 2015 Jul 21;49(14):8611-22
pubmed: 26121005