I agree, Claudia: If Europe decides to go through only the WWTP way in phosphorus reuse, it has an influence on promoting ecological sanitation elsewhere as well (most likely would make it more difficult).

Any suggestions for the contributions to EC regarding phosphorus reuse? I met a manufacturer/seller of waterless urinals yesterday and we were agreeing that legislation to support the reuse of collected urine would be really useful.

Dear Sami,

thank you for raising the issue of sustainable sanitation also in Europe! As Europe has been a pioneer in environmental legislation which other countries often follow it is a good sign. But what does this resolution mean for sanitation approaches and system in practice and on the ground. To fill the legislative frame with concrete statement and guidance, technical or others, can be the role of SuSanA partners.

A quick reply by
Claudia

My first post here (after using the forum as a knowledge source for quite some time, thanks for keeping it so lively!). I'm Sami Keto from Global Dry Toilet Association of Finland (GDTF).

I deciced to put the message under this existing topic although starting a new one might (and sorry if I missed a more relevant one). It's about contributing to the European Commissions Consultative Communication on the Sustainable Use of Phosphorus .

We were thinking about whether a joint statement would be more influential and are asking around in Finland for interested parties. What do you think about a joint contribution between some European SuSanA members, would there be any added value?

Anyway it might be useful to discuss the content of the contibutions here. While it's great that EC has an ambitious target with P reuse, ther's some indication that the strategy to reuse P from toilet waste would focus only on advancing the technology in municipal waste water treatment plants. What we've thought so far is to highlight two points in relation to that.

1. Chemical precipitation of P is quite efficient but results in low fertilizer value of the end product and thus e.g. P leachate from fields to water systems. Biological P removal (separately or in combination with chemical precipitation) gives a much better end product for P fertilizer use. However the use of biological removal at the moment is still marginal and has uncertainties in operational reliability; targeting P removal from toilet waste through only this method might thus be a risky strategy. Partial decentralizing of the management of toilet waste into ecological sanitation methods could provide a safer option.

2. Waste water treatment plants don't really collect nitrogen well. Resource efficiency in N use would also be really important. Prices of N fertilizers are rising even faster than P fertilizers. N loading from waste water treatment plants to water systems and oceans and/or to the atmosphere is a major contributor to eutrophication and climate change. In terms of eutrophication and food security issues it would be more feasible to deal P reuse from toilet waste in conjuction with N reuse. Ecological sanitation methods would able better collection for both.

Any feedback or other views are welcome. The legal framework that is discussed in this topic is . Of course one can hope that this EC process would lead into such legislation that would e.g. rather support than prevent the use of urine etc. Some other joint initiatives (with SuSanA members) on that might be quite useful as well; also here in Finland we have identified current legislation as one of the major obstacles for sustainable sanitation.

Regards,

Sami Keto
Project Coordinator
Capacity building of Finnish NGOs in Ecological sanitation
Global Dry Toilet Association of Finland

Hi,

I am Marcos, from Ecuador.

The lack of legal framework is a problem all around the world. Would be great if we start that topic as a global approach (probably is already created... hope I find it soon!).

We need positive legal framework on all dimensions; we even need special legal framework for experimental projects. So any plan to increase resources would be useful: forum, studies/research, legal references from other countries, etc.

Anybody knows if there is a Different Countries Legal Framework inventory? Would be great if we can based on other countries experiences to promote local changes in our countries/regions.

Thanks for any information!
Marcos

Reading up on the latest CEEP newsletter on P-recovery (src: www.ceep-phosphates.org/Files/Newsletter/ScopeNewsletter91.pdf), I would like to know if anyone of you out there is going to attend the

"1st European Sustainable Phosphorus Conference 2013 (ESPC2013)"

on 6 and 7 March 2013, which will take place at Square Brussels in Belgium?

I missed the deadline and the conference is limited to 250 participants only, but the conference seems to be very promising as it includes two topics on P-recycling from wastewater: www.phosphorusplatform.org/espc2013/topic5.html

I am also interested in the experiences from Japan which seem to be so much different from the wait&see approach we have in the EU: www.phosphorusplatform.org/espc2013/topic18.html

(I've seen that SEI, WASTE and Aqua4All are going to attend - anyone else? And would those attending be willing to share their impressions on this forum? Bedankt!)

Dear Geoffroy,

I agree what you say on the lack of a real legislation.
But I am sure that a network like SuSanA can do proposal at european level to implement sustainable pilot projects that can help us in our national action to develop ecological sanitation.
The problem is how we can do it ? Nobody is in charge of that subject.
It could be the start for creating a SuSanA group named "Ecological sanitation in EU" Or "P reuse projects in EU" or "P recovery action group".
Easy to say, long and difficult to start.
I hope that we will find a way to act to be active in that subject and not dependent to big water companies.

Regards

Emmanuel
Ecodomeo

Dear Emmanuel,
Dear all,

In Belgium, we are a group aiming at developing ecological sanitation practice. The main problem we have is the absence of legal output for the products of sanitation. In compost-treatment plants, people in charge don't want fecal matter because of hygiene risks. A project to make safe compost based on fecal sludge and/or product from vacuum toilets to be spread on organic matter like straw is being planed with university research, but funding is still missing.

No legal framework exist for urine application but it would fall in the sludge legislation, wich means that the products have to be regulary tested, so money and big infrastructure are needed, wich is difficult for small-pilot-project.

It seems to be the same in several european countries. As far as I know, urine application exist in Germany only for exceptional research goal (is there any hope that the project would lead to a broader legal application of urine in Germany? Are there relevant outputs that would lead to economical treatment of urine?), and in Sweden under fecal sludge legislation.

Without legal output, there is not much hope of development. Are there any people working in ecological sanitation in EU here who would have hope of development? Is there yet a group thinking about SuSan in Europe? Or the only way would be to enhance the existing infrastructure to recover P in sludge or even in the ashes? Separation is good in theory, but can it be put into practice at large scale in Europe?

You might be interested in the thesis of Meinzinger about resource efficiency of sanitation :
www.susana.org/lang-en/library?view=ccbktypeitem&type=2&id=1152

Thanks in advance for all relevant information,

With my best regards,

Geoffroy Germeau

Thank you very much for that information.
Now we have to see how the european countries translate that text in national legislation.
It could be interesting to see what is done in every country.
Good news

Emmanuel
Ecodomeo

Dear all,
there's probably a lot that could be said about the EU resolution on recource efficiency, but the good news is: the intended P recovery is now part of "our" EU policy:

52. Calls on the Commission to make use of best practice in the field of resource efficiency in order to draw up appropriate criteria and start pilot projects for several resources, for example phosphorus, with a view to achieving virtually 100% reuse by 2020 and optimising their use and recycling; emphasises that such pilot projects should receive direct funding from the EU;

src: www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?p...223+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN

Who would have thought that the money/progress comes from the demand-for-organic-fertilisers-side? Sanitation, made possible by a demand for nutrients, not for sanitation as such? Could this be a future option?