Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 590

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Phosphorus recovery from municipal wastewater: An integrated comparative technological, environmental and economic assessment of P recovery technologies

Open access
Egle, L., Rechberger, H., Krampe, J., Zessner, M.·2016·Science of The Total Environment

Abstract

Phosphorus (P) is an essential and limited resource. Municipal wastewater is a promising source of P via reuse and could be used to replace P derived from phosphate rocks. The agricultural use of sewage sludge is restricted by legislation or is not practiced in several European countries due to environmental risks posed by organic micropollutants and pathogens. Several technologies have been developed in recent years to recover wastewater P. However, these technologies target different P-containing flows in wastewater treatment plants (effluent, digester supernatant, sewage sludge, and sewage sludge ash), use diverse engineering approaches and differ greatly with respect to P recycling rate, potential of removing or destroying pollutants, product quality, environmental impact and cost. This work compares 19 relevant P recovery technologies by considering their relationships with existing wastewater and sludge treatment systems. A combination of different methods, such as material flow analysis, damage units, reference soil method, annuity method, integrated cost calculation and a literature study on solubility, fertilizing effects and handling of recovered materials, is used to evaluate the different technologies with respect to technical, ecological and economic aspects. With regard to the manifold origins of data an uncertainty concept considering validity of data sources is applied. This analysis revealed that recovery from flows with dissolved P produces clean and plant-available materials. These techniques may even be beneficial from economic and technical perspectives under specific circumstances. However, the recovery rates (a maximum of 25%) relative to the wastewater treatment plant influent are relatively low. The approaches that recover P from sewage sludge apply complex technologies and generally achieve effective removal of heavy metals at moderate recovery rates (~40-50% relative to the WWTP input) and comparatively high costs. Sewage sludge ash is the most promising P source, with recovery rates of 60-90% relative to the wastewater P. The costs highly depend on the purity requirements of the recycled products but can be kept comparatively low, especially if synergies with existing industrial processes are exploited.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.07.019

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 590

Metadata

Authors
Egle, L., Rechberger, H., Krampe, J., & Zessner, M.
Venue
Science of The Total Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-11
Volume
571
Pages
522-542
ISSN
0048-9697 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2479100805
Cited by
590
References
0
FWCI
45.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Phosphorus recovery from municipal wastewater: An integrated comparative technological, environmental and economic assessment of P recovery technologies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.07.019
The paper
Egle, L., Rechberger, H., Krampe, J., & Zessner, M. (2016). Phosphorus recovery from municipal wastewater: An integrated comparative technological, environmental and economic assessment of P recovery technologies. Science of The Total Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.07.019

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.