European phosphorus balance: uses and

losses in agriculture & other sectors

Kimo van Dijk

Researcher Nutrient management & phosphorus security

Wageningen University, kimo.vandijk@wur.nl

P-REX Summer School, Basel, Switzerland, 10 September 2014

Overview

Phosphorus (P) cycling, scarcity & price

Present P flows in Europe

Sustainable P use options in society

Local ‘waste’ supply & agricultural demand

Dynamic food system model

Future P use scenario analyses

Summary & conclusions

Geological versus anthropogenic cycles

RESOURCE

RESERVES

SINKS

Society

Crops

Animals

Industry & retail

Consumers

Non-

food

Losses Inputs

[90% fertilizer,

and other

mineral P use]

Geological cycle

Direct

IMPACTS

Anthropogenic cycle

R/P ratio for P, K & micronutrients

A simplistic way of expressing resource scarcity

R/P ratio = reserve / production

De Haes et al. 2012

Dutch P fertiliser price developement

Reijneveld 2013 (PhD thesis)

Phosphorus use in the EU-27 in 2005

Detergent,

wood, paper

& fibers

Crops, fish,

food products &

mineral additives

Animal feed,

mineral additives

& live animals

Mineral fertiliser,

seeds & pesticides

Solid & liquid

organic waste

Organic wastes

Wood, paper &

fibers

Slaughter

residues, solid &

liquid waste

Crops &

food products

Manure losses

Live animals

Leaching & runoff

Seeding materials

Input Output

Soil [150,000]

Flows & stocks in Gg = Mkg = kton P per year

Global fertilizer P consumption 1961-2010

FAOSTAT data 2010

Fertilizer P consumption in EU-27 in 2010

FAOSTAT data 2010

Main sources of P-rock in the EU [Mt/yr]

30 years remaining for Finland at current rate

of extraction, which is only 10 % of EU demand

De Ridder et al 2012

Animal feed P origin in EU-27 in 2005

Source: Miterra-Europe model, CAPRI & FAOSTAT data 2003-2005

Agronomic P balances in the EU

Annual regional agricultural P balances [kg P/ha] for EU-15 in 2000

Estimated cumulative P balances [kg P/ha] of EU countries during 1991–2005

Source: Csathó & Radimszky 2012

Source: Csathó &

Radimszky 2012

Average phosphate surplus in Dutch

agriculture 1880-2010

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Year

Su

rplu

s,

kg

P2O

5/h

a

-1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000C

um

ula

tive s

urp

lus, k

g P

2 O5 /h

a

AnnualCumulative

Target2015

1 kg P = 2.29 kg P2O5 Ehlert et al. 2011

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

Do

me

stic

fo

od

P s

up

ply

[kg

/ca/

year

] Animal

Plant

Domestic food P supply in EU-27 in 2005

Domestic food P supply necessary to fullfill human dietary P intake requirements at consumption level

Van Dijk et al. (in preparation)

Minimum P intake requirement

Mean EU P intake

Maximum P intake level

Detergent P consumption in EU-27 in 2005

Based on Wind 2007

Reuse of organic waste in EU-27 in 2005

Based on Barth et al. 2008

Sludge destinations in EU-27 in 2010

Source: P-Rex, FP7 project, www.p-rex.eu; based on Eurostat

2010, Milieu Ltd 2010 & Destatis 2011

P concentrations in rivers and lakes in EU

regions, period 1990 - 2005

Source: European Environment Agency, 2007

Sustainable P use options

Potential phosphorus losses in society

Three ‘types’ of potential P losses:

● Sequestration: incineration, landfilling, co-firing or use in the cement industry

● Accumulation: in agricultural soils or the environment

● Export: flows with unclear destinations

Avoidable and unavoidable losses

Point and diffuse sources

Direct and indirect actors

Transition towards sustainable P use

•remove non-essential P inputs (e.g. detergents)

•match P requirements more closely (precision agriculture)

•utilise legacy P stores

Realign P inputs

•optimise input management

•minimise runoff and erosion

•strategic retention zones

Reduce P losses to water

•avoid wastage

•improve utilization efficiency

•adopt integrated production systems

Recycle P in bioresources

•recover P in societies' wastes

•produce fertilizer substitutes

Recover P in wastes

•influence dietary choice

•define end-user P requirements

•re-connect crop and animal production systems

Redefine P in the food chain

Withers, Van Dijk, et al. (submitted)

P recycling potential in EU-27

[Gg P/year] Total Recycled Potential

Sewage sludge 297 115 182

Biodegradable solid waste 130 38 92

Meat & bone meal 128 6 122

Total (minimum) 427 153 274

Total (maximum) 555 160 396

Mineral fertiliser use 1448

Manure use 1763

Van Dijk et al. (in preparation)

P2O5 contents of common ‘wastes’

[% P2O5] Fresh matter

Dry matter Ash

Mean Mean Mean

Meat & bone meal 9.5 9.7 33.1

Pig manure 0.4 5.0 18.8

Bio (kitchen) waste 0.4 0.6 17.1

Sewage sludge 6.5 6.9 15.7

Chicken manure 1.9 2.7 15.3

Green (garden) waste 0.2 0.3 9.7

Iron slag 5.6

Bark 0.10 0.11 3.0

Wood 0.05 0.07 2.6

Coal 0.1 0.1 0.5

Phosphorus (P) flows in Rotterdam city in 2011 related to households (HH, yellow) and non-households (NHH, blue) Quantities in tons P/year Uncertainty range in %

Source: Kirsimaa & van Dijk

(2013). Urban farming in

Rotterdam: an opportunity for

sustainable phosphorus

management. MSc thesis,

Wageningen University

Destination P flows from Rotterdam

households

Tons P

/year

% of total

Incineration

Sludge 261.4 44.9 Organic waste 122.9 21 Cat & other animal excreta 44.7 7.7 Textiles 11.2 1.9

Paper & carton 7.4 1.3

Household & sanitary paper 0.8 0.1 Wood 0.6 0.1

Environment Dog excreta 61.4 10.6

Effluent wastewater 58.5 10.1

Compost Garden waste 2.4 0.4 Organic waste 1.2 0.2

Bioenergy plant Wood 1.4 0.2

Garden waste 1 0.2

Recycling & reuse

Paper & carton 4.2 0.7 Textiles 2.2 0.4

Wood 0.6 0.1

Total P quantity 582 100%

Source: Kirsimaa & van Dijk (2013). Urban farming in Rotterdam: an opportunity

for sustainable phosphorus management. MSc thesis, Wageningen University

Source: Kirsimaa & van Dijk (2013). Urban farming in

Rotterdam: an opportunity for sustainable phosphorus

management. MSc thesis, Wageningen University

P losses from Rotterdam households

98.2%

0.6% 1.2%

Household P destinations

Lost

Reused

Recycled

21.5%

11.3% 45.7%

0.4%

10.2%

10.8%

Lost P destinations

Incineration of

organic waste

Incineration of non-

food solid waste

Incineration of

sludge

Biomass/energy

production

Effluent water to

surface water

Dog excreta left in

parks/incinerated

Linking Rotterdam P supply with demand

Supply (lost P households): 572 tons P /year

Urban farming area

● 105 initiatives, each 0.3 ha = 105*0.3 = 32 ha

Potential P availability: 17,875 kg P/ha

Max. application limits for arable land (Dutch Government regulations): 19,984 ha required

Crop P demand based on highest and lowest P removal

Source: Kirsimaa & van Dijk (2013). Urban farming in Rotterdam: an opportunity

for sustainable phosphorus management. MSc thesis, Wageningen University

Crop P demand based on crop removal

Crop type P removal

[kg/ha]

Urban farming

crop P demand

[tons P/year]

Required land

to apply total

lost P [ha]

Highest P removal

Fieldbiens 39 1.24 14,317

Lowest P removal

Brocolli 5 0.16 110,079

Most common

consumed/grown crop

Grain crops 18 0.56 7,232

Source: Kirsimaa & van Dijk (2013). Urban farming in Rotterdam: an opportunity

for sustainable phosphorus management. MSc thesis, Wageningen University

Total potential P supply (lost P) = 572 tons P/year Total Rotterdam urban farming area = 32 ha

Crop P demand based on crop removal

Source: Kirsimaa & van Dijk (2013). Urban farming in Rotterdam: an opportunity

for sustainable phosphorus management. MSc thesis, Wageningen University

Calculated range of land needed to host lost P 7 , 232 ha (highest P removal crops) – 110, 079 ha (lowest P removal crops)

Comparison: Present total green surface area : 12, 674 ha

Regional urban P management

Source: Kirsimaa & van Dijk (2013). Urban farming in Rotterdam: an opportunity

for sustainable phosphorus management. MSc thesis, Wageningen University

Rotterdam seaport circular economy

Source: Port of Rotterdam/ Rabobank – Pathways to Circular

Economy, Coert Beerman & Hans Smits

Source: Kate Royston: Robbee Smole –

Sustainable Business Solutions, May

2012

Greenmills bio-

refinery (closed

loop bio-diesel and

bio-gas; electricity

and heat) at the

Port of Amsterdam

is supplying

recovered

phosphorus to a

neighbouring ICI

Fertilisers facility.

EU-27 P use scenario analyses

Objectives & research questions

To develop a dynamic model for the analysis of the effects of changes in drivers and nutrient management strategies on P dynamics in the food chain.

What would be the P dynamics & food production in EU-27 in case of a stop of P import via

● Q1: mineral fertilizers?

● Q2: mineral fertilizers and animal feed?

Q3: What are effects of best management practices (BMPs) on food production and P use efficiency?

Dynamic Food System model

Mass balance principle

Data: Miterra-Europe, CAPRI,

FAOSTAT, Eurostat, reports,

articles and experts

EU-27 at country level,

timesteps of one year

Entire food system + non-food

P imports, exports, losses and

internal flows

Flows described dynamically as

function of sector input

Crop P uptake as function of

soil P stock and P application

Dynamic crop P uptake

Scenarios & best management practices

The scenarios are:

● BAU: present (~2005), Business as Usual

● S1: no P import via mineral fertilizer

● S2: no P import via fertilizer + feed + additives

● S3: as S2 + BMPs

The best management practices (BMPs) are 90 % less:

● biowaste + waste water P losses (HC)

● forestry sector losses (NF)

● slaughter waste losses (FP)

● stable manure losses (AP)

No changes in other drivers and factors, such as population, agricultural area, crop types etc.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

05

20

30

20

55

20

80

21

05

21

30

21

55

21

80

22

05

22

30

22

55

22

80

Ave

rage

cro

p P

up

take

[kg

P/h

a/ye

ar]

BAU

SI

S2

S3

Per ha EU-27 crop P uptake per scenario

for 2005-2300

50 %

25 %

Van Dijk et al. (in preparation)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

20

05

20

30

20

55

20

80

21

05

21

30

21

55

21

80

22

05

22

30

22

55

22

80

Ave

rage

so

il P

sto

ck [

kg P

/ha]

BAU

SI

S2

S3

Per ha EU-27 soil P stock per scenario for

2005-2300

Van Dijk et al. (in preparation)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

Fran

ce

Lith

uan

ia

Luxe

mb

ou

rg

Ire

lan

d

Ge

rman

y

Swe

de

n

Un

ite

d K

ingd

om

Bel

giu

m

Cze

ch R

ep

ub

lic

Ital

y

Bu

lgar

ia

Mal

ta

Den

mar

k

Gre

ece

Esto

nia

Spai

n

Ro

man

ia

Ne

ther

lan

ds

Po

rtu

gal

Fin

lan

d

Slo

vaki

a

Po

lan

d

Au

stri

a

Latv

ia

Hu

nga

ry

Cyp

rus

Slo

ven

ia

BAU

S1

S2

S3

Per capita food P supply per Member State

per scenario in 2050

Van Dijk et al. (in preparation)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

20

05

20

30

20

55

20

80

21

05

21

30

21

55

21

80

22

05

22

30

22

55

22

80

Ave

rage

fo

od

P s

up

ply

[kg

P/c

a/ye

ar]

BAU

SI

S2

S3

Changes in per capita food P supply in

EU-27 per scenario for 2005-2300

Van Dijk et al. (in preparation)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

20

05

20

30

20

55

20

80

21

05

21

30

21

55

21

80

22

05

22

30

22

55

22

80

Ave

rage

dry

mat

ter

yie

ld [

kg P

/ha/

year

]

BAU

SI

S2

S3

Changes in dry matter crop yield in EU-27

per scenario for 2005-2300

50 %

33 %

Van Dijk et al. (in preparation)

Conclusions for the present state

Europe is largely dependent on P imports via:

● Mineral fertilizers (60%), animal feed & additives (20%),

food (10%) & non-food materials (10%)

Ongoing P accumulation in agricultural soils, especially in western Europe by P surplusses

Various recycling rates, generally low (except manure):

● Sewage sludge P recycling ranging from 0 - 90%

● Compost P re-use ranging from 0 - 70%

Significant P losses via:

● Waterways: sewage discharge, leaching & erosion

● Sequestration: incineration, landfilling, infrastructure

High potential to improve P use efficiency

Conclusions for future scenarios

Soil P is an important stock to take into account in P dynamics, because of its buffering capacity and large size (~150.000 Gg P)

A stop on P fertilizer import has a large effect on food production, mainly on the longer term

A stop on P import via fertilizer and animal feed makes the effect even more pronounced, causing a larger and earlier drop in food production

The effects can be mitigated by the implementation of best management practices in nutrient management

Additional data is necessary, especially for downscaling to the regional level

Thank you for

your attention

Questions? Comments? Suggestions? kimo.vandijk@wur.nl / kimovandijk@xs4all.nl Twitter: @kimovandijk Website: kimovandijk.weebly.com

Additional literature and links

Presentation “Phosphorus use in Europe”, European Sustainable P conference, 6-7 March

in Brussels: http://www.phosphorusplatform.eu/images/Presentation_KimovanDijk.pdf

Outcomes 2nd Scientific European Phosphorus Workshop in Wageningen:

http://www.wageningenur.nl/sepw2013

Lesschen et al. 2013. Options for closing the phosphorus cycle in agriculture; Assessment

of options for Northwest Europe and the Netherlands. edepot.wur.nl/289653

K.A. Wyant, J.R. Corman, and J.J. Elser. Phosphorus, Food, and Our Future. Oxford

University Press, New York City, New York, USA.

http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199916832.do#.UcHr6fY6VVM

European Commission - Sustainable Phosphorus Use:

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/research/newsalert/pdf/IR7.pdf

Dutch Nutrient Platform: www.nutrientenplatform.nl

European Sustainable Phosphorus Platform: www.phosphorusplatform.eu