Interventions to close the P cycle in The Netherlands

Interventions to close the P cycle in The Netherlands Oscar Schoumans, Oene Oenema, Kimo van Dijk, Phillip Ehlert, Wim Chardon Jaap Schröder Johan Sanders, Koen Meesters Nico Verdoes Wageningen University and Research Centre

Outline 1. Dutch P balance 2. Strategies for closing the P balance Agriculture Combined manure, waste and sludge treatment 3. Conclusions

Dutch P flows (2008): Import 115 mill. kg P Feed Fert. Other 65% 11% 24% Agric. IMPORT (100%) 45% Food & Non-Food Industries 32% 11% Export Manure 18% Households Waste Industry 9% 18% 3% 1% 18% 11% 2% 28% 5% 22% Soil Diffuse P Water/Sea Landfill Controlled P ash (incineration waste & sludge) 43% Export Products 45% EXPORT Products 2% Export Products 55% LOSSES Source: De Buck et al., 2012

Philosophy of sustainable use of P Through a combination of: Reduce P inputs in the food chain where possible Reuse P containing organic materials Recover & recycle P from waste streams Redefine the system, human choices and diets

Agricultural P cycle 5 P- recovery P export Intervention scheme technical solutions Manure Mineral concentrates 4 Manure separation 3 Livestock Arable Akkerbouw land 2 Bio-refinery Concentrated feed fertilizer P import Non-food Reduction P input 1

1. Reducing P inputs via fertilizers and feed Reduction of P content animal feed (cows & pigs) Overall Reduction P in feed: dairy cattle 20-25% pigs 25% No negative effects on animal performance, health and fertility. Effective at short term Limited increase of feeding costs (< 4%) Reduction of amount of P in manure by about 5-10 million kg P Source: Van Krimpen et al. (2010)

2. Bio,refinery Separation of phosphates (and protein) from feed resources Water Animal feed Acid extraction Alkaline extraction Washing Low N/P/K wet feed Phosphates Proteins Digestible K-rich water stream May contribute to lowering the amount of P in manure by 1 3 million kg P But effects on feed quality and costs not yet known. Source: Meesters et al. (2011)

3. Manure separation Aim: (i) to replace P fertilizers by manure fractions, and (ii) to fill,up the room set by limits Separation: many technical options available Better N/P,ratio both liquid and solid fraction Liquid fraction: N, & K,rich and H 2 O Solid fraction: P, and organic matter rich 4R Nutrient Stewardship: Right fertilizer source, Right rate (P status), Right time, and Right placement Energy costs separation << energy costs of transport of water Reduction of the amount of P in manure by 1 3 million kg P Manure separator sieve belt Source: Schröder et al. (2011)

4. Mineral concentrates Aim: to produce mineral NK concentrates (substitute for fertilizers) from the liquid fraction of manure However, the EU Nitrate Directive states that all products derived from animal manure remains animal manure, and have to comply with the manure rules of the Nitrate Directive Pilot with 8 installations were tested: Technique: reversed osmosis (RO) Source: Velthof et al. (2012)

Mineral concentrates: Example treatment technique

Mineral concentrates: average composition Mineral concentrates: High N and K contents; Low P content NH 4 : ± 90% of N,total ph >7.5 Large differences between treatment plants Pilots: Important opportunities, but still in discussion with Brussels Plant N-total N-NH 4 P K g/kg g/kg % Ntotal g/kg g/kg A 6.4 5.9 92 0.2 7.1 B 7.2 6.9 96 0.01 6.8 C 8.9 7.8 88 0.34 8.4 D 5.3 4.7 89 0.11 6.8 E 4.2 3.6 86 0.08 5.5 F 8.1 7.1 88 0.26 8.1 H 11 10.5 95 0.27 15.7

5. P recovery from manure Aim: to recover P from manure and process it into secondary P Industries are interested Fertilizer industries (inorganic and organic P fertilizers) Incineration / biomass plants Phosphorus producer Possible reduction of the amount of P in manure by 10, 20 million kg P

Phosphate and Phosphorus recovery Communal waste water Mineral concentrates Agricultural land Pig slurry Effluent WWTP (waste water treatment plant) Pretreatment (N,K & P) Liquid fraction Biogas/ CHP/ residual heat Short term Wet solid fraction household waste Drying SNB (sludge treatment) (incineration & energy production) Incineration/Biomass plant (incineration & energy production) Long term Dry solid fraction Fertlizer industry (e.g. ICL Fertilizers Europe) P producer (THERMPHOS) Pyrolysis plant (BTG, icw ECN) Phosphate fertilizer Phosphate ash fertilizer Phosphorus (P4) Export P-Biochar Source: Schoumans et al., 2011 Production of secondary P for industries with an existing international market

Treatment options of the liquid manure fraction Treatment of P Ca-P NH 4 - or K-Struvite Treatment of N: NH 4 struvite N-stripping and producing (NH 4 ) 2 SO 4 - solution Treatment of K: K struvite Treatment of soluble C (to be tested) Physical separation via percolation over sludge of WWTP

Treatment options of the liquid manure fraction Source: Schoumans et al. (2011)

Public-Private- Collaboration Phosphate and Phosphorus recovery Communal waste water Effluent Waterboards WWTP (waste water treatment plant) Mineral concentrates Pretreatment (N,K & P) Ministries (Brussels) Agricultural land Liquid fraction Pig slurry Farmers organisations Biogas/ CHP/ residual heat SNB (sludge treatment) (incineration & energy production) Biomass plants household waste Incineration/Biomass plant (incineration & energy production) Short term Long term Wet solid fraction Drying Dry solid fraction Fertlizer industry (e.g. ICL Fertilizers Europe) P producer (THERMPHOS) P requiring industries (fertilizer and P industries) Pyrolysis plant (BTG, icw ECN) Phosphate fertilizer Phosphate ash fertilizer Phosphorus (P4) Export P-Biochar Source: Schoumans et al., 2011 Production of secondary P for industries with an existing international market

Potential value of pig slurry Table Potential value of pig slurry ( m -3 ) based on average composition content 1) (kg/m 3 ) lower market price 2) ( /kg) upper market price 2) ( /kg) Total ( /m 3 ) Total ( /m 3 ) Nitrogen (inorganc N) 3 0.204 0.476 0.61 1.43 Potassium (K 2 O) 8 0.128 0.298 1.02 2.38 Phosphate (P 2 O 5 ) 3.7 0.234 0.546 0.87 2.02 Organic matter (solid phase) 40 0.091 0.117 3.64 4.68 Total ( m -3 ) 6.14 10.51 1) Römkens and Rietra (2008); content of inorganic N, P 2 O 5 and organic matter; content of K 2 O estimation 2) LEI land- en tuinbouwcijfers 2008; 15-35 % of the fertilizer market prices: KAS (N), TSP( P 2 O 5 ) and K60 (K 2 O) and value of energy production of organic matter (based on 0.07-0.09 per KWh) Source: Schoumans et al. (2010)

Indicative costs of P recovery (P,ash) Indicative costs to produce P ash from manure ( m -3 pig slurry) no drying limited drying drying separation, optional drying and transport liquid and solid 9-11 13-16 15-18 Treatment solid fraction 9.5-0.4-2.9 Treatment liquid fraction 11-14 11-14 11-14 Total 30-35 24-30 23-29 Source: Schoumans et al. (2010)

Agricultural P cycle Increase use of P 20-25 mill. kg P 5 P- recovery P export Intervention scheme technical solutions 10-20 mill. kg P Manure Mineral concentrates Manure separation 4 3 1-5 mill. kg P Livestock Arable Akkerbouw land 2 Bio-refinery Concentrated feed fertilizer P import Non-food 1-3 mill. kg P Reduction P input 1 4-8 mill. kg P

Conclusions By 2015, agriculture net reduction about 25,30 million kg P (30% of imported P) and waste 20,30 million kg P (25%). Dutch strategy: Decreasing P in animal feed and make use of bio,refinery techniques Manure separation and mineral concentrates (4R Nutrient Stewardship: Right fertilizer source, Right rate (P status), Right time, and Right placement also reduce P losses to water P recovery from manure and waste (e.g. waste water sludge) What would be the most cost efficient, successful and sustainable European strategy to close the P cycle???? What s missing???

Questions???