Environmental Research 156 (2017) 39–46

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Environmental Research
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envres

Sewage sludge disposal strategies for sustainable development MARK

a a a a a
Małgorzata Kacprzak , Ewa Neczaj , Krzysztof Fijałkowski , Anna Grobelak , Anna Grosser ,
⁎
Małgorzata Worwaga, Agnieszka Rorata, , Helge Brattebob, Åsgeir Almåsc, Bal Ram Singhc
a
Institute of Environmental Engineering, Czestochowa University of Technology (CUT), Czestochowa, Poland
b
Industrial Ecology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway
c
Department of Environmental Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU), Aas, Norway

A R T I C L E I N F O A BS T RAC T

Keywords: The main objective of the present review is to compare the existing sewage sludge management solutions in
Sewage sludge terms of their environmental sustainability. The most commonly used strategies, that include treatment and
Waste management disposal has been favored within the present state-of-art, considering existing legislation (at European and
Wastewater treatment plants national level), characterization, ecotoxicology, waste management and actual routs used currently in particular
LCA
European countries. Selected decision making tools, namely End-of-waste criteria and Life Cycle Assessment
has been proposed in order to appropriately assess the possible environmental, economic and technical
evaluation of different systems. Therefore, some basic criteria for the best suitable option selection has been
described, in the circular economy “from waste to resources” sense. The importance of sewage sludge as a
valuable source of matter and energy has been appreciated, as well as a potential risk related to the application
of those strategies.

1. Introduction a critical biologically active mixture of water, organic matter (derived

As the global demand for renewable energy and organic matter
increases, organic wastes, including sewage sludge, could be one of the
available resources for this purpose. This substrate can be used as an
energy resource for power and heat with conventional and emerging
technologies. Moreover, sewage sludge can be considered as a substrate
for soil fertilization and remediation if the applied technology allows to
obtain the product of quality. Such re-uses of sewage sludge are
economically viable and environmentally sustainable compared to
waste handling and landfilling. Potential environmental improvements
of existing solutions include reduction in greenhouse gas emissions,
improvement of soil conditions and a reduction in fossil fuel use. The
economic potential is found in offsetting costs related to traditional
waste treatment methods, reduced health costs due to appropriate
waste treatment and decreased energy costs by the usage of biogas and
biofuels, which can partially replace traditional fuels.
To obtain these goals, wastewater treatment operations require
careful management of sewage sludge, not only after removal from the
treatment facility, but also during the treatment process. The new
strategies shall fit into the eco-innovation trend in order to fulfill the
main concept of European Commission “reduce, reuse, recycle” cur-
rently strategy understood as the most preferable waste management
hierarchy. As an output of wastewater treatment plant, sewage sludge is
from human wastes, food wastes, etc.), dead and alive microorganisms
(including pathogens), and inorganic and organic toxic contaminants
(e.g., metallic trace elements, PAHs). Some quantity of sludge is
routinely recycled within the treatment facility process in order to
optimize operations. However, huge quantities of sewage sludge need
to be removed from wastewater treatment plants and thus managed.
This “raw” sludge typically contains 97–98% of water. Therefore, to be
utilized as a beneficial biosolid, it must be treated properly. The desired
new/upgraded technologies shall allow for a full recycling of organic
matter and reduction of the potential risk associated with the presence
of pollutants. Moreover, in spite of the fact that sewage sludge
represents a few percent of the total volume of processed wastewater,
the costs associated with its processing accounts for 50% percent of the
whole operating expenses at the wastewater treatment plant (U.S. EPA,
2008). This paper provides a summary overview of management
strategies for economic and sustainable use of sewage sludge.
2. The laws and regulations of the European Union
concerning sewage sludge disposal
The European Union legislation concerning the disposal of sewage
waste is included in the Council Directive 86/278/EEC on environ-
mental protection of 12 June 1986 (the so-called Sludge Directive)

⁎
Correspondence to: Czestochowa University of Technology, Institute of Environmental Engineering, ul. Brzeznicka 60a, 42-200 Czestochowa, Poland.
E-mail address: agnieszkarorat@gmail.com (A. Rorat).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2017.03.010
Received 16 August 2016; Received in revised form 23 January 2017; Accepted 6 March 2017
0013-9351/ © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
M. Kacprzak et al.
Fig. 1. The sewage sludge treatment processes at the WWTP.
(Directive, 1986). The Directive 2000/60/EC of the European
Parliament and Council of Europe adopted on 23 October 2000 sets
of the norms of joint Community action in the field of Water Policy
(WFD, 2000). This Water Framework Directive (WFP) defines sludge
not as a waste material, but as a ′product’ of sewage treatment. The
operational directive of the WFD is the Directive 91/271/EEC adopted
on 21 May 1991 concerning the treatment of municipal sewage
(Directive, 1991) The Directive obliges to monitor and report munici-
pal sewage treatment and final disposal of municipal sewage sludge for
agglomerations. Article 14 of Council Directive 91/271/EEC refers to
sludge produced in the course of sewage treatment and states that
sewage sludge has to be reused in each appropriate case, to prevent
adverse effect. Implementation of this Operational Directive till the end
of 2015 increased the stream of sewage sludge, but on the other hand,
it enabled other methods of sewage sludge reuse. Limits regarding
storage of sewage sludge are introduced by the Directive 99/31/EC of
26 April 1999 on sludge storage, called the Landfill Directive
(Directive, 1999).
Sewage sludge is the subject of European Parliament and Council
Directive (2008)/98/EC of 19 November 2008 on waste (Commission,
2008) which is the Waste Framework Directive, that regulates recycling
of wastes, including sewage sludge. According to the above- mentioned
Directive, sewage sludge defined as waste is a subject to the procedure
assigned for waste treatment. The Directive states that prevention of
waste production is the first priority, the next being preparation of
waste for reuse, recycling, or other forms of recovery and finally waste
disposal. It is not possible to avoid the production of sewage sludge.
Therefore, other steps of dealing with this specific waste are very
important, i.e. preparation for reuse, understood as sludge reproces-
sing (including possible energy recovery or organic recycling).
Directive 2010/75/EC of 24 November 2010 (Comission, 2010) on
industrial emission officially updates and combines other directives,
including Directive (2008)/1/EC (Directive (2008) on integrated pre-
vention of pollution and its control (IPPC), Directive (2001)/80/EC on
the limitation of emission of certain pollutants into air from large
combustion plants (Parliament and Union, 2001) and Directive 2000/
76/EC of 4 December 2000 on incineration of waste (Parliament and
Union, 2001) the so- called Incineration Directive which precises the
norms and rules for incineration of waste and emission standards.
Whereas the Directive of the European Parliament and Council 2009/
28/EC of 28 April 2009 on the promotion of energy from renewable
sources (Parliament, 2009) amends and as a consequence abates
Directive (2001)/77/EC (Directive, 2001) and 2003/30/EC
(Commission, 2003) indicating compulsory energy levels to be derived
from renewable energy sources. Another document, the Technical
Report for End-of-Waste Criteria on Biodegradable Waste Subject to
Biological treatment, whereas the Third Working Document (IPTS and
Comission, 2012) places sewage sludge on the positive waste list and
allows “clean” sewage sludge to be used as fertilizer and gives way to
qualify it as a waste product.
40
Environmental Research 156 (2017) 39–46
Analysis of these regulations gave highest importance to: the
Landfill Directive, which will restrict the amount of sewage sludge
and other organic wastes sent to landfills, and possible future local
controls on pathogen content to ensure public acceptance. A broad
range of national and sub-national legislations could influence the
spreading of sewage sludge on land in the coming decade. Many other
pieces of legislation will be important, from Registration, Evaluation
and Authorization of Chemicals (REACH) – of which restrictions on
chemicals may reduce contaminants in sludge and increase public
confidence – to the new Directive on renewable energy, which could
encourage the use of sewage sludge for biogas and other forms of
energy recovery.
Commission Staff Working Document from 2 July 2014 concerning
on the Ex-post evaluation of Five Waste Stream Directives, including
Sewage Sludge Directive (SSD) is one of the oldest UE Directives,
survived without any alteration, mainly due to the fact that no
consensus could be reached about the right adjustment of limit values
for heavy metals in sludge and soil. Additionally, in the opinion of
European Commission, SSD has no recycling targets, the objective is
rather to stimulate good environmental practice in increasing use of
sewage sludge in agriculture. Moreover, several stakeholders stated
that for assessing future relevance, it is important to assess links
between the SSD and the Fertilizer Regulation, in particular how
sewage sludge and sludge products will fit into the future Regulation.
3. Sludge processing
It is estimated that approximately 50% of the costs of operating
secondary sewage treatment plants in Europe can be associated with
sewage sludge treatment and disposal. Hence, not only the quality of
the raw sewage sludge has influence on the final character of sewage
sludge, but also several processes realized within sewage sludge
treatment at Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTP's) are involved in
this process.
A typical process is summarized as follows (Fig. 1) (Metcalf et al.,
2013; Wójtowicz et al., 2013).
• preliminary treatment (screening, comminuting),
• primary thickening (gravity, flotation, drainage, belt, centrifuges),
• liquid sludge stabilization (anaerobic digestion, aerobic digestion,
lime addition),
• secondary thickening (gravity, flotation, drainage, belt, centrifuges),
• conditioning (elutriation, chemical, thermal),
• dewatering (plate press, belt press, centrifuge, drying bed),
• final treatment (composting, drying, line addition, incineration, wet
oxidation, pyrolysis, disinfection),
• storage (liquid sludge, dry sludge, compost, ash),
• transportation (road, pipeline, sea),
• final destination (landfill, agriculture/horticulture, forest, land re-
claimation, land building, other uses).
M. Kacprzak et al. Environmental Research 156 (2017) 39–46

Table 1
Characteristics of municipal sewage sludge.

Parameter Type of sludge

Untreated Digested Secondary

primary sludge primary sludge sludge

Total dry solids 2.0–8.0 6.0–12.0 0.8–1.2

[TS], (%)
Volatile solids (% of 60–80 30–60 59–88
TS)
Grease and fats (% 7–35 n/a 5–12
of TS)
Protein (%TS) 20–30 15–20 32–41
Cellulose (% of TS) 8.0–15.0 8.0–15.0 7–9.7
Phosphorus (% of 0.8–2.8 1.5–4.0 2.8–11.0
TS)
Nitrogen (%of TS) 1.5–4 1.6–6.0 2.4–5.0
Potasium (% of TS) 0–1 0–3.0 0.5–0.7
pH 5.0–8.0 6.5–7.5 6.5–8.0
Fig. 2. The production of sewage sludge in selected countries of EU.

n/a – data not available.

4. Characterization of sewage sludge as a substrate
Dewatered sewage sludge (dry), depending on stabilization pro-
cesses, contains on average 50–70% of organic matter, and 30–50%
mineral components (including 1–4% of inorganic carbon), 3.4–4.0%
N, 0.5–2.5% P and significant amounts of other nutrients, including
micronutrients (Fytili and Zabaniotou (2008); Samolada and
Zabaniotou (2014); Tyagi and Lo (2013). Organic matter from sewage
sludge mineralizes fast due to relatively small content of lignin or
cellulose, and its rapid degradation could generate a peak in the nitrate
and pollutant concentration in soil (Directive, 1986) Sewage sludge
also contains large concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus and can
be considered as a fertilizer for plants. Nevertheless, it also comprises
different contaminants, both inorganic (such as heavy metals) and
organic (such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlori-
nated biphenyls (PCBs), adsorbable organohalogens (AOX), pesticides,
surfactants, hormones, pharmaceuticals, nanoparticles and many
others (Siebielska, 2014) Moreover, the presence of several pathogenic
species of living organisms, like bacteria, viruses and protozoa along
with other parasitic helminths can create potential hazards to the
health of humans, animals and plants (Fijalkowski et al., 2014;
Kacprzak and Stańczyk-Mazanek, 2003) The numbers of pathogenic
and parasitic organisms in sludge can be significantly reduced before
application to the land by appropriate sludge treatment (lime treat-
ment) and thus reducing the potential health risks (Farzadkia and
Bazrafshan, 2014; Olszewski et al., 2013). Table 1 shows the char-
acteristic of different types of sewage sludge (Fytili and Zabaniotou,
2008; Samolada and Zabaniotou, 2014; Tyagi and Lo, 2013).
5. Sewage sludge management strategies
According to the EU Report (Comission, 2008b) more than 10
million tons of dry solids (DS) of sewage sludge were produced in 26
EU Member States in 2008, of which approximately 36%, (3.7 million
tons DS), was recycled in agriculture. For example, in the countries
located near the Baltic Sea watershed, the amount of generated sewage
sludge was about 3.5 million tons of dry solids annually – which is
expected to increase to almost 4 million tons by 2020. As shown in
Fig. 2 (Eurostat, 2015), Germany is the highest sludge producer,
followed by the United Kingdom and France. In addition to other
countries like Spain and Italy, they produce more than 500000 t DM
annually. It is estimated that these 5 countries generate altogether
nearly 75% of the European sewage sludge. This situation generally
reflects the demography of each country.
It is known that landfill disposal of sludge affects the leachate
production and the CO2 emissions directly to the air (Barberio et al.,
2013). As shown in Table 2 (Eurostat, 2015) the main methods of
sewage sludge management in the EU remain: agricultural use and
incineration. Despite of the fact that approximately about 40% of the
total sludge produced in the EU is used for agriculture purposes, the
individual EU countries are very different in terms of the amount of
sewage sludge that is directed to the soil. Some EU Members have
adopted stricter limit values for contaminants than those contained in
the SSD. Others added some new contaminants. Several Member States
are taking into consideration the environmental risk after applying
sludge to agricultural land and have even banned its use, while others
use it widely and are still improving sludge management. In Belgium,
Denmark, Spain, France, Ireland and the United Kingdom, the amount
of sludge used for agriculture was more than 50% in 2010 (Comission,
2008b). However, in other countries, for instance in Finland and
Belgium < 5% is used for agricultural purposes. In Greece,
Netherlands, Romania, Slovenia and Slovakia sludge is not used in
agriculture. In Poland, a gradual decrease in landfilling of sewage
sludge and increase in their thermal conversion has been observed. In
non- EU countries, such as Norway and Switzerland, larger amounts of
sludge are applied in agriculture. According to Directive (1999) Norway
had an official target to recycle 60% of biosolids to farmland, which was
reached already; in 2008 as 80% of biosolids were recycled to farmland
or green areas. Switzerland, in contrast, has banned the use of biosolids
on farmland since 2005.
It is estimated that the average costs of different wastewater
treatment and disposal of non-treated sludge is 160–210 EUR/tonnes
DM. In the case of use of dewatered sludge in agriculture or forestry,
including incineration with household waste or reclamation of de-
graded areas, costs increase to about 210–300 EUR/tonnes DM.
Details concerning the average costs of different strategies of manage-
ment of sewage sludge in all European countries are shown in Table 3
(Jakobsson and Gustafson, 2012) However, the range of cost may differ
between countries (Tables 4 and 5) (Henclik et al., 2014; Jakobsson
and Gustafson, 2012; Wiechmann et al., 2013) According to Wójtowicz
et al. (2013) nowadays, there are two main directions for sewage sludge
management, namely organic recycling and recycling of the energy and
material (as shown in Fig. 3).
Smith (2002) suggests the use of the Best Practicable
Environmental Options (BPEO) as an approach, which reduces envir-
onmental pollution and damage and improvements in the quality of the
environment. This approach allows for a selection of a direction for
sludge treatment and disposal that will minimize the overall potentially
adverse environmental impacts, on a case-by-case basis with costs with
secondary role. According to BPEO, it is possible to assess the impact
on all environmental media (water, air, soil). Nevertheless, frequently it
requires objective justifications of significance and many other envir-

41
M. Kacprzak et al. Environmental Research 156 (2017) 39–46

Table 2
Sewage sludge management in selected countries of EU.

UE country Sewage sludge - total Sewage sludge – Sewage sludge - Sewage sludge - Sewage sludge - compost Sewage sludge -
disposal landfill incineration agricultural use and other application dumping at sea

(103 t) (103 t) (103 t) (103 t) (103 t) (103 t)

2002 2013 2002 2013 2002 2013 2002 2013 2002 2013 2002 2013

Belgium 113.66 0 12.95 n/a 71.05 n/a 18.97 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a
Germany n/a 1794.73 n/a 0 n/a 1034.77 n/a 491.33 n/a 264.4 n/a 0
Estonia n/a 18.79 n/a 1.81 n/a n/a n/a 0.29 n/a 16.27 n/a 0.42
Greece 77.65 n/a 77.65 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a
France n/a 869.74 n/a 30.92 n/a 160.63 n/a 368.58 n/a 287.49 n/a 0
Latvia 21.46 20.74 0 0.24 0 0 3.15 7.48 1.42 2.3 0 0
Netherlands 353.9 n/a 39.8 n/a 204.3 n/a 0 n/a 51.1 n/a 0 n/a
Poland 435.74 540.3 192.49 31.4 6.78 72.9 67 105.4 26.54 32.6 n/a 0
Slovakia 51.27 57.43 4.44 6.64 n/a 5.01 41.96 0.52 n/a 35.21 0 0
United Kingdom 1533.82 n/a 123.96 n/a 305.82 n/a 842.53 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Norway 103.13 131.2 16.09 18.6 n/a n/a 43.56 82.6 14.71 29.9 n/a n/a
Switzerland 200 194.5 4 0 153 188.3 38 0 5 0 n/a 0

n/a – data not available.

Table 3 Table 5
Average cost of different strategies of management of sewage sludge in European Management costs for sewage sludge at Poland and Sweden.
countries.
Methods Cost (EUR/DS)
Methods of utilization Costs (EURO/ t DM)
Poland Sweden
Agriculture
Raw sludge 160 Agriculture 75 100
Partly dewatered sludge (15–25%DS) 160 Landfill 125 215
Dry sludge 210 Composting 150 –
Forestry 240 Co-incineration 375
Composting 310 Mono-incineration 438
Incineration 315 Drying and incineration – 240
Reclamation of landfills and degraded areas 255 Soil production – 200
Landfill 255

onmental factors. Agricultural use of sewage sludge is usually con-
sidered as the BPEO, but it requires specific analysis of sludge and is
dependent on many external factors, for example, the agreement of
farmer derive only from his good will and acceptance. Many countries
restrict the use of sewage sludge for food production due to potential
risk of pathogens and transmission of contaminations. On contrary,
incineration of sewage sludge is necessary in the case of large urban
WWTPs or when quality of sewage sludge prohibits its use on land
according to the law.
Many countries (i.e. Norway) found that sewage sludge and sludge
co-products can be recycled, i.e. by making products (fertilizers)
intended to be sold in the market. That kind of strategy includes two
major principal trends. The first one is production of heat, electricity
(made from biogas) as a specific products that have renewable
potential. The second trend is to treat the bio solids as products in
which the sewage sludge is a major component. This products can be
used on-site which is practiced for many years (i.e. at wastewater
treatment plants) and also have a potential to be sold in the open
market. Sustainable development of sewage sludge procedures shall

Table 4
Sewage sludge management costs at Germany.

Sewage sludge management method Sewage sludge management costs (EUR/t of wet substance) Sludge type

min max

Co-incineration at coal fired power plants 80 130 Dry: greater than 85%
Cement plant co-incineration 90 100 Dry: greater than 85%
Mono-incineration 80 120 Mechanically dewatered:
20–45% dry substance
Waste incineration plant co-incineration 80 100 Mechanically dewatered: 20–45% dry substance
Co-incineration at coal fired power plants 75 100 Mechanically dewatered:
20–45% dry substance
Co-incineration at lignite fired power plants 50 75 Mechanically dewatered:
20–45% dry substance
Recultivation 30 45 Mechanically dewatered:
20–45% dry substance
Farming, trans-regional 33 45 Mechanically dewatered:
20–45% dry substance
Farming, regional 25 30 Mechanically dewatered:
20–45% dry substance
Farming, liquid 8 12 Mechanically dewatered:
20–45% dry substance

42
M. Kacprzak et al.
Fig. 3. The main strategies of sewage sludge disposal.
include: 1) maximizing the sludge recycle/recovery benefits through
renewable energy dependent systems; 2) development of the innovative
technologies and management systems, which are appropriate to local
environmental conditions, including geo-economy, climate, etc.
There is no universal technological solution which will consider
local issues and sustainable development (Barberio et al., 2013).
Hence, each country should conduct a comprehensive analysis of the
life cycle assessment (LCA) for the entire stream of sewage sludge
produced in the country or in the region, which takes into account both
the processes of manufacturing, processing, and final disposal.
Fig. 4 (Wójtowicz et al., 2013) presents the recommendations for
preferable processes of sewage sludge treatment, which are based
mainly on the size of WWTP and volume of sewage sludge produced.
Other authors divided the technology selection criteria as follows
(Tyagi and Lo, 2013; Fig. 5):
• social (protect public health and safety, minimize community
disruption, land requirement);
• economic (technology status, affordability);
• environmental (greater energy efficiency input-output, upstream
and on-site emission, secondary waste production)
43
Environmental Research 156 (2017) 39–46
However, many other factors can also influence sludge manage-
ment, such as development related to climate change policy and
renewable energy (Comission, 2008a):
• increased attention related to climate changes and mitigation of
greenhouse gas emissions, which focuses attention on additional
benefits of sludge applications to soils;
• an expected increase in treatment of sludge with energy recovery
through anaerobic digestion, incineration or other thermal treat-
ment, with recycling of the ash and recovery of phosphates;
• a probable increase in production and utilization of biogas from
sewage sludge, as well as some production of alcohols and other
fuels directly from sewage sludge using pyrolysis and gasification;
• an increase in application of sludge to fuel crops such as
Miscanthus, willows, hybrid poplars and other non-food energy
crops;
• a sewage sludge turnover into a carbon neutral construction
material that could replace traditional clay and concrete bricks.
While not an explicit case study, the Inventory of Existing
Studies Applying Life Cycle Thinking to Biowaste Management,
authored by the European Commission Joint Research Centre,
reviews multiple LCA studies on organic waste management. It
M. Kacprzak et al. Environmental Research 156 (2017) 39–46

Fig. 4. Main recommendations of selected processes of sewage sludge treatment in dependence on population equivalent (PE).

Fig. 5. Social, economic and environmental criteria for related to technology development for resource recovery from waste sludge.

Fig. 6. Possible way of sewage sludge management as a function of energy input-output.

44
M. Kacprzak et al. Environmental Research 156 (2017) 39–46

presents the following preliminary conclusions (Krutwagen et al.,

2008):
• landfilling of biowastes should be avoided in favor of other
treatment options as it is not an efficient environmental ap-
proach;
• the choice of the preferred organic waste treatment system should
be a result of analysis of particular local factors, such as avoided
products, availability of other waste treatment options, and
efficiency of treatment facilities;
• the positive effects of organic wastes recycling results from
avoided products and can exceed the negative effects of the waste
management system needed to achieve these outcomes;
• optimal environmental performance is considered as well opti-
mized when multiple organic waste treatment methods are
adopted simultaneously instead of just focusing on a single
treatment method.

Unfortunately, it is very difficult to find relevant LCA studies on this

topic. Many studies focus on single processes of a system, are
incomplete in scope, do not include all organic wastes or use very
rough assumptions.

6. Possible scenarios of sewage sludge management

Long-time land spreading of sludge may lead to the accumulation of

contamination (i.e. heavy metals) in agricultural soil and affect whole
ecosystems. In spite of the fact, that the accumulation level does not
exceed currently permissible values, growing scientific knowledge
about soil and flora interactions allows to understand the danger of
their fate in the environment. One of the possible directions of sewage
sludge management has been presented by Spinosa et al. (2011).
According to authors, the system should include three main processes:
Anaerobic digestion, Dewatering/Drying, and Thermal treatment by
Pyrolysis/Gasification, which are efficiently coupled for the recovery of
products for material reuse, and/or for energy purposes, in the specific
context in which the system is located (Fig. 6).
7. Conclusions
Main concept of the waste hierarchy includes recovery over disposal
and according life cycle thinking, EPR, circular economy, have no
function in a non-product related way of sludge management. Basically
“material recovery” involves the processing of by-products on the
highly valued market: granules, fertilizer, and compost. In those terms,
sewage sludge shall be considered as a reservoir of energy and precious
compounds that should obligatory be recycled, i.e. organic matter,
carbon, phosphorus, nitrogen, volatile acids or even proteins. Though,
implemented strategies focus on technologies that lead to high recovery
rate of sludge as a resource and subsequently allow for a maximum
removal of harmful compounds. The selection of most suitable sewage
sludge management scenario for the particular area needs the usage of
decision-making tools, i.e. LCA that allow for the assessment of a
probable environmental impact of proposed strategies. Different ap-
proaches are required by large municipal wastewater treatment plants,
which produce the greatest amount of sewage sludge and where the
main goal should be to maximize energy recovery and small rural
facilities where recovery of matter should be dominant. In a medium-
sized wastewater treatment plant, one can consider increasing the
efficiency of energy recovery while still achieving a good quality product
possible for further processing (e.g. for composting process). The
authors of this review propose other scenario in order to reduce
greenhouse gases emissions, reduce the use of non-renewable natural
resources, reduce of soil pollution and reduced migration of contami-
nants in the food chain. The whole strategy is aimed at the improve-
ment of co-digestion of sewage sludge, composting of sewage sludge
with by-products and plant biomass, land spreading of high quality
Fig. 7. The possible scenario of sewage sludge management.
compost for phytoremediation of contaminated soils (or reclamation of
degraded land) as well as cultivation of energetic plants (Fig. 7). From
one side, such way of sewage sludge management allows to avoid non-
controlled environmental risk. On the other hand, it could be included
into circular economy at the each step of processing. Especially when it
comes to phosphorous recycling, which is a scarce resource. Nowadays,
many technologies focusing on recovery of phosphorus from sewage
sludge are described and several pilot projects also commercial scale
operations have been developed. However, still almost 25% of waste-
water phosphorus is currently reused in the EU, most often through
direct application of sewage sludge to soil, while the total achievable
potential for recovery is about 300,000 t of phosphorus per year in the
EU (Abdulai et al., 2015).
It is important to say that all sewage sludge management strategies
should include market analysis of the final products and estimate of the
size of markets and determine the time for a feasible solution.
Therefore, sewage sludge management strategy should reject solutions
with high degree of risk, taking into consideration that the main
purpose of alternative for sludge management is sewage sludge
disposal and long-term nature of the applied solution.
Acknowledgments
The research leading to these results has received funding from the
Polish-Norwegian Research Programme operated by the National
Centre for Research and Development under the Norwegian
Financial Mechanism 2009–2014 in the frame of Project Contract
No (POL NOR/201734/76).
References
Abdulai, M., , et al.2015. Circular Economy of Phosphorus Flow. 〈http://www.helsinki.fi/
henvi/teaching/Reports_15/01_P_flow.pdf〉.
Barberio, G., et al., 2013. Treatment and disposal of sewage sludge: comparative life cycle
assessment on italian case study Extended abstract. Environ. Eng. Manag. J. 12,
7–10.
Comission, E., 2008a. Environmental, economic and social impacts of the use of sewage
sludge on land; Final Report; Part I: Overview Report. In: W. a. R. f. t. E. C. Milieu

45
M. Kacprzak et al.
Ltd, DG Environment under Study Contract DG ENV.G.4/ETU/2008/0076r, (Ed.).
Comission, E., 2008b. Environmental, economic and social impacts of the use of sewage
sludge on land; Final Report; Part III: Project Interim Reports In: W. a. R. f. t. E. C.
Milieu Ltd, DG Environment under Study Contract DG ENV.G.4/ETU/2008/0076r,
(Ed.).
Comission, E., 2010. Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 24 November 2010 on industrial emissions (integrated pollution
prevention and control) Text with EEA relevance.
Commission, E., 2003. Directive 2003/30/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 8 may 2003 on the promotion of the use of biofuels or other renewable
fuels for transport. Off. J. Eur. Union, 5.
Commission, E., 2008. Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain directives (Waste
framework directive, R1 formula in footnote of attachment II): 〈http://eur-lex.
europa.eu/LexUriServ.LexUriServ.do〉.
Directive, C., 1986. Council directive on the protection of the environment, and in
particular of the soil, when sewage sludge is used in agriculture. Off. J. Eur.
Commun. 181, 0006–0012.
Directive, C., 1999. Council Directive 99/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste
(Landfill Directive). Off. J. Eur. Communities L. 182, 16.
Directive, E., 2001. Directive 2001/77/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
of 27 September 2001 on the promotion of electricity produced from renewable
energy sources in the internal electricity market. Off. J. Eur. Communities L., 283.
Directive, I., 2008. Directive 2008/1/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
of 15 January 2008 concerning integrated pollution prevention and control. Off. J.
Eur. Union, L., 24.
Directive, U.W.W.T., 1991. Council Directive 91/271/EEC concerning urban wastewater
treatment. OJ L., 135.
Eurostat, 2015. Sewage sludge production and disposal from urban wastewater (in dry
substance (d.s)).
Farzadkia, M., Bazrafshan, E., 2014. Lime stabilization of waste activated sludge. Health
Scope 16, 17.
Fijalkowski, K., et al., 2014. Occurrence changes of Escherichia coli (including O157: h7
serotype) in wastewater and sewage sludge by quantitation method of (EMA) real
time—PCR. Desalin. Water Treat. 52, 3965–3972.
Fytili, D., Zabaniotou, A., 2008. Utilization of sewage sludge in EU application of old and
new methods—a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 12, 116–140.
Henclik, A., et al., 2014. Conditions of sewage sludge management in Poland and
Germany [in Polish]. Inżynieria i Ochr. Środowiska. 17, 185–198.
IPTS, Comission, E., 2012. Technical report for end-of-waste criteria on biodegradable
waste subject to biological treatment Third Working Document.
46
Environmental Research 156 (2017) 39–46
Jakobsson, C., Gustafson, A., 2012. Sustainable Agriculture. Baltic University Press,
Uppsala, Sweden.
Kacprzak, M., Stańczyk-Mazanek, E., 2003. Changes in the structure of fungal
communities of soil treated with sewage sludge. Biol. Fertil. Soils 38, 89–95.
Krutwagen, B., et al., 2008. Inventory of Existing Studies Applying Life Cycle Thinking to
Biowaste Management. Office of Official Publications of the European Communities,
Luxembourg.
Metcalf, et al., 2013. Wastewater Engineering: Treatment and Resource Recovery.
McGraw-Hill Education.
Olszewski, J.M., et al., 2013. The effect of liming on antibacterial and hormone levels in
wastewater biosolids. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part A. 48, 862–870.
Parliament, E., 2009. Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable
sources and amending and subsequently repealing directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/
30/EC. J. Eur. Union L. 140, 47.
Parliament, T.E., Union, T.C.O.T.E., 2001. Directive 2001/80/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2001 on the limitation of emission of
certain pollutants into air from large combustion plants. Official Journal of the
European Communities L 309, 27.11. 2001. 44, 1-21.
Samolada, M., Zabaniotou, A., 2014. Comparative assessment of municipal sewage
sludge incineration, gasification and pyrolysis for a sustainable sludge-to-energy
management in Greece. Waste Manag. 34, 411–420.
Siebielska, I., 2014. Comparison of changes in selected polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
concentrations during the composting and anaerobic digestion processes of
municipal waste and sewage sludge mixtures. Water Sci. Tech. 70, 1617–1624.
Smith, S.R., 2002. Management, use and disposal of sewage sludge. Encyclopedia of life
support systems (EOLSS). EOLSS Publishers Co. Ltd.
Spinosa, L., et al., 2011. Sustainable and innovative solutions for sewage sludge
management. Water 3, 702–717.
Tyagi, V.K., Lo, S.-L., 2013. Sludge: a waste or renewable source for energy and resources
recovery? Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 25, 708–728.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2008. Municipal Solid Waste in The United
States: 2007 Facts and Figures. EPA530-R-08-010. November. 〈http://www.epa.
gov/epawaste/nonhaz/municipal/pubs/msw07-rpt.pdf〉.
WFD, E., 2000. Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy. Joint
text approved by the Conciliation Committee provided for in Article. 251.
Wiechmann, B., , et al., 2013. Sewage sludge management in Germany.
Umweltbundesamt (UBA) | Postfach 1406 | 06844 Dessau-Roßlau | Germany.
Wójtowicz, A., , et al., 2013. Modelowe rozwiązania w gospodarce osadowej. Bydgoski
Dom Wydawniczy" Margrafsen".