User:Envpoli/Sewage sludge

To my peer reviewers:

Notes about what I plan to do (i.e. notes to myself, but that I won't be adding to my article) are in bold and italicized.

Parts of the original section that I plan to delete ~~are in strikethrough~~.

New sentences that I have written, or edits that I have made to existing sentences are in bold.

The first section I copied over here from the Sewage Sludge article is the section of that article on the European Union here. The original is the image and the first three paragraphs in the section. I've written the whole section on the Sewage Sludge Directive from scratch.

The second section I copied over here from the Sewage Sludge article is the section of that article on the United States here. The original has 5 paragraphs and a bullet list of court cases.

First Section I Am Working On (from the Sewage Sludge article)

European Union

European legislation on dangerous substances has eliminated the production and marketing of some substances that have been of historic concern such as persistent organic micro-pollutants. The European Commission has said repeatedly that the "Directive on the protection of the environment, and in particular of the soil, when sewage sludge is used in agriculture" (86/278/EEC) has been very successful in that there have been no cases of adverse effect where it has been applied. Should be deleted because there are no citations to support these big claims.

The EC encourages the use of sewage sludge in agriculture because it conserves organic matter and completes nutrient cycles. Recycling of phosphate is regarded as especially important because the phosphate industry predicts that at the current rate of extraction the economic reserves will be exhausted in 100 or at most 250 years.^[1] Phosphate can be recovered with minimal capital expenditure as technology currently exists, but municipalities have little political will to attempt nutrient extraction, instead opting for a "take all the other stuff" mentality.^[2]^{[unreliable source?]} First sentence has no citation, but could be useful information to identify a citation for; would be helpful to incorporate into the Sewage Sludge Directive section. The last two sentences do not fit in this section, and should be moved elsewhere (if the sources can be validated).

European countries that joined the EU after 2004 favor landfills as a means of disposal for sewage sludge.^[3] In 2006, the predicted sewage sludge growth rate was 10 million tons of sewage sludge per year.^[4] This increase in the amount of sewage sludge accumulation in the EU can be due to the increase in the number of households that are connected to the sewage system.^[5] The EU has directives in place to encourage the use of sewage sludge in agriculture, in a way that the soil, humans, and the environment are not harmed.^[6] A guideline the EU has put into place it that sewage sludge should not be added to fruit and vegetable crops that are in season.^[6] In Austria, in order to dispose of the sewage sludge in a landfill, it must first be treated in a way that reduces its biological reactivity.^[7] Sweden no longer allows sewage sludge to be disposed in the land fills.^[7] In the EU, regulations regarding sewage sludge disposal differ because legislation regarding landfill disposal in not in the national regulations for the EU.^[7]

Sewage Sludge Directive

The EU's Sewage Sludge Directive (86/278/EEC) sets out regulations to pursue the dual purpose of promoting the use of sewage sludge as an agricultural fertilizer, while ensuring environmental protections and human health.^[8]^[9] These rules include sludge treatment requirements, as well as limits on the time and place of sewage sludge applications, depending on the type of food crop.^[9]^[10] This is intended to protect human health while maintaining the ecological health of the soil and water.^[11] The directive explicitly regulates the allowable levels of seven heavy metals (cadmium, copper, nickel, lead, zinc, mercury, and chromium) in soil and sludge, and regulates any application of sewage sludge that would cause levels of these heavy metals in soil to exceed those limits.^[9]^[11]

EU member states are tasked with implementing and enforcing the Directive within their borders, as well as monitoring and reporting on sludge production, treatment, characteristics, and use.^[9]^[12] Member states are allowed to set more stringent limits for heavy metals than set out in the Sewage Sludge Directive, and can set limits for other pollutants.^[10]^[11]^[12] As of 2021, more than half of the EU member states had stricter limits for mercury and cadmium than required under the Directive.^[11]

Member states are also allowed to limit or promote the use of sewage sludge for agriculture as they choose, meaning that some countries prohibit the use of sludge in agriculture, while some use up to 50% of the sludge they generate in agriculture.^[13] Spain, France, Italy, and the United Kingdom (while it was still part of the EU) have particularly promoted the use of sludge in agriculture.^[11]

Since the Directive's passage, there has been the substantial decrease in heavy metal residues in agricultural soils over time (well below the limits set), though it is not possible to determine what proportion of the decrease is due to the Directive itself, as opposed to other national and EU legislation.^[10]^[13]

The Sewage Sludge Directive has been evaluated several times under EU proposals to build a circular economy through the reduction and reuse of wastes.^[11]^[14] In 2014, a European Commission evaluation of the Sewage Sludge Directive suggested it was appropriate for its goals, and did not need revision.^[13]^[11] In 2023, as part of the European Green Deal and Circular Economy Action Plan, the EU re-evaluated the Sewage Sludge Directive, and found that it should be maintained – as the use of sewage sludge as fertilizer aligns with circular economy goals and potentially reduces the EU carbon emissions – but that the potential pollutants and contaminants regulated under the Directive should be reviewed and potentially revised.^[10]^[14]^[15] This evaluation noted that, as of 2023, the original Directive had not been seriously updated since its original passage in 1986, even though in the intervening decades there had been many developments in both environmental policy, expectations, and research, as well as member states' national policies around sewage sludge.^[10] The evaluation particularly emphasized concerns about methane emissions, microplastic contamination, and antibiotic resistances.^[10]

The Sewage Sludge Directive has not yet set limits for other contaminants, such as organic pollutants, pathogens, microplastics, pharmaceutical residues, and personal care product residues.^[10]^[12] With the identification of these new contaminants in sludge since the Sewage Sludge Directive originally passed, several researchers have suggested that the EU should consider revising the Directive to address their potential risks to health and environment.^[12]^[11]

Austria

Each of Austria's federal states has its own regulations for the use of sewage sludge in agriculture, including different limits for heavy metals.^[11] For example, Tyrol has banned the use of sludge on agricultural lands, while in Salzburg it is only allowed under certain conditions.^[11]

Denmark

France

Germany

United Kingdom

Second Section I Am Working On (from the Sewage Sludge article)

United States

After the 1991 Congressional ban on ocean dumping, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) instituted a policy of digested sludge reuse on agricultural land. The US EPA promulgated regulations – 40 CFR Part 503 – that continued to allow the use of biosolids on land as fertilizers and soil amendments which had been previously allowed under Part 257. The EPA promoted biosolids recycling throughout the 1990s. The EPA's Part 503 regulations were developed with input from university, EPA, and USDA researchers from around the country and involved an extensive review of the scientific literature and the largest risk assessment the agency had conducted to that time. The Part 503 regulations became effective in 1993.^[16]

According to the EPA, biosolids that meet treatment and pollutant content criteria of Part 503.13 "can be safely recycled and applied as fertilizer to sustainably improve and maintain productive soils and stimulate plant growth." However, they can not be disposed of in a sludge only landfill under Part 503.23 because of high chromium levels and boundary restrictions.

Biosolids that meet the Class B pathogen treatment and pollutant criteria, in accordance with the EPA "Standards for the use or disposal of sewage sludge" (40 CFR Part 503), can be land applied with formal site restrictions and strict record keeping.^[17] Biosolids that meet Class A pathogen reduction requirements or equivalent treatment by a "Process to Further Reduce Pathogens" (PFRP) have the least restrictions on use. PFRPs include pasteurization, heat drying, thermophilic composting (aerobic digestion, most common method), and beta or gamma ray irradiation.^[18]

The EPA Office of the Inspector General (OIG) completed two assessments in 2000 and 2002 of the EPA sewage sludge program. The follow-up report in 2002 documented that "the EPA cannot assure the public that current land application practices are protective of human health and the environment." The report also documented that there had been an almost 100% reduction in EPA enforcement resources since the earlier assessment. This is probably the greatest issue with the practice: under both the federal program operated by the EPA and those of the several states, there is limited inspection and oversight by agencies charged with regulating these practices. To some degree, this lack of oversight is a function of the perceived (by the regulatory agencies) benign nature of the practice. However, a greater underlying issue is funding. Few states and the US EPA have the discretionary funds necessary to establish and implement a full enforcement program for biosolids.^[19]

As detailed in the 1995 Plain English Guide to the Part 503 Risk Assessment, the EPA's most comprehensive risk assessment was completed for biosolids.^[20]

Under the Obama Administration, the Biosolids Center of Excellence (headquartered in EPA Region 7) was created to monitor and enforce compliance with biosolids regulation.^[21] The Center receives and reviews annual reports from the major producers of biosolids.^[21]

Eight US states oversee their own biosolids programs: Arizona, Michigan, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Wisconsin; other states' programs are overseen by the EPA.^[21]

Court cases in the United States

In 2009, James Rosendall of Grand Rapids, MI was sentenced by United States District Judge Avern Cohn to 11 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release for conspiring to commit bribery. Rosendall was the former president of Synagro of Michigan, a subsidiary of Synagro Technologies. His duties included obtaining the approval of the City of Detroit to process and dispose of the city's wastewater.^[22]^[23]
In 2011, Travis County Commissioners declared that Synagro's solid waste disposal activities would be inappropriate and prohibited land use according to the towns already established ordinances.^[24]
A battle between the home rule of local government and states rights/commerce rights has been waged between the small town of Kern County, California, and Los Angeles, California. Kern county passed an ordinance "Keep Kern Clean" ballot initiative which banned sludge from being applied in Kern County. Los Angeles sued and after a protracted verdict, won the case in 2016.^[25]^[26]^[27]
In 2012, two families won a $225,000 tort lawsuit against a sludge company that contaminated their properties.^[28]
In 2013 in Pennsylvania, the case Gilbert vs. Synagro, a judge barred a nuisance, negligence and trespass lawsuit under Pennsylvania's Right to Farm Act.^[29]

Other sentences I've written that I might want to add to other sections?

As of 2023, the EU produced 2 to 3 million tons of sludge each year.^[10]

As of 2023, 40% of sludge produced in the EU was used on agricultural land.^[10]

As of 2023, 27% of sludge produced in the EU was incinerated.^[10]

As of 2023, 10% of sludge produced in the EU was composted.^[10]

As of 2023, 11% of sludge produced in the EU was disposed of in landfills.^[10]

The EU is attempting to phase out the disposal of sludge in landfills.^[10]

The dominant method for disposal of sewage sludge in the EU is via application to agricultural lands.^[10]

The specific content of sewage sludge is affected by what enters the sewage stream, and how the sewage is treated and processed. As wastewater treatment policies are passed or amended to allow or regulate potential contaminants into the sewage stream, the content of the sewage sludge reflects those changes. For example, the EU's Urban Waste-Water Treatment Directive shapes the types of contaminants that enter the EU's sewage treatment stream.^[10]

These are notes to myself

On other countries:

Leschber, R., Abu-Orf, M., Laquidara, M., Osborne, G. J., Ockier, P., Esch, B., Müller, J. A., Chan, W. C., Garai, G., Nakazato, T., Phae, C. G., Jung, Y. C., Bernacka, J., Ianuli, V., Šmna, J., Herrero, A. M., & Shimp, G. F. (2002). International report: Sludge management and related legislation. Water Science & Technology, 46(4-5), 367-371. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2002.0627

Things to follow up on:

The EU's Waste Framework Directive sets out a waste hierarchy.^[10]

EU Fertilizing Products Regulation (on sludge-derived products).^[11]

EU Landfill Directive^[11]

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Water_statistics#Wastewater_treatment_and_disposal

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/biosolid

https://www.michigan.gov/egle/about/organization/water-resources/biosolids/definition

https://www.dep.pa.gov/Business/Land/Waste/SolidWaste/Residual/BeneficialUse/Documents/3800-FS-DEP2344.pdf

https://www.wwdmag.com/sludge-and-biosolids/article/10917313/biosolids-or-sludge-the-semantics-of-terminology

https://www.ecos.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/PFAS-in-Biosolids-A-Review-of-State-Efforts-and-Opportunities-for-Action.pdf

https://www.perrytwp.org/DocumentCenter/View/3117/EPA-Biosolids-Fact-Sheet

https://www.wef.org/topics/practice-areas/biosolids-resource-recovery/