Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on "The revision of Council Directive 86/278/EEC on the use of sewage sludge in agriculture"

(2001/C 14/26)

On 2 March 2000 the Economic and Social Committee, acting under the third paragraph of Rule 23 of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an opinion on "The revision of Council Directive 86/278/EEC on the use of sewage sludge in agriculture".

The Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment, which was responsible for the preparatory work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 6 September 2000. The rapporteur was Mr Nilsson.

At its 376th plenary session held on 19 October 2000 the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion unanimously.

Summary

The document describes the sewage system for collecting waste from urban areas and the possible use of sewage sludge in agriculture. Sludge and other organic waste contain nutrients for plants, which are a key resource for sustainable agriculture and society. However, in urban sludge the nutrients are mixed with numerous metals and organic pollutants. To maintain high soil quality, maybe a 100 % increase of the metal concentration could be tolerated in soils producing food over the next 10000 years. To avoid soil damage only suitably certified types of sludge should be used in agriculture today. The ESC recommends that, when Directive 86/278/ECC is to be reviewed, the following suggestions should be taken on board:

- it should be stipulated that the long-term aim is to channel non-pollutant nutrients back into agriculture;

- a holistic approach should be adopted and all effluent wastes coming from waste water treatment plants not covered by the Water Framework Directive and other urban waste water should be regulated;

- by facilitating investments and other measures, improvement of the quality of sewage sludge should be stepped up sharply;

- the metal content in sludge permitted for agricultural use to be heavily reduced;

- liability for environmental damage caused by sludge use to be properly assigned;

- Community minimum requirements on soil protection should be initiated.

1. Background

1.1. The purpose of this ESC own-initiative opinion is to set out the Committee's views on the use of sewage sludge in agriculture so that a revised "Sewage Sludge" Directive (86/278/EEC) paves the way for, and promotes, development which allows the nutrients for plants which are contained in organic waste to be used in agriculture without causing pollution and without damaging soil properties.

1.2. The organic waste produced by society mainly comes from the country's own farm produce or imports of plant or animal origin. This waste naturally contains the nutrients plants need. They are a major resource for agriculture. However, it must be ensured that these nutrients without added pollutants are returned to agricultural land.

1.3. In addition to organic waste containing nutrients, other substances are introduced as a result of domestic use (washing, washing-up, use of different chemicals and the wearing out of household appliances). A large number of different chemical substances are also added via other local activities. These substances have no place in agriculture or food production and compromise the sustainability of arable soil and food quality. Mixing desirable and undesirable materials generates problems.

1.4. The most important task of waste water treatment plants is to purify waste water. The organic material is processed/digested to reduce the volume of sludge and remove malodorous substances. Waste water treatment plants may filter out 90 % of the phosphorus and 15 % of the nitrogen, micronutrients and organic matter present in the waste water, thereby purifying it so that it can be released into watercourses. The waste produced by this purification process is sewage sludge.

1.5. In the cleaning process, not only the precipitated nutrients for plants and the organic matter are collected but also numerous undesirable chemical substances from urban waste water. The presence of these undesirable substances reduces the possibility of securing broad acceptance by farmers and consumers for the use of sewage sludge in agriculture.

1.6. Researchers and environmental and farmers' organisations also question whether, under the current system, the waste water treatment plant manages to remove both metals and hazardous organic substances sufficiently when purifying the waste water.

1.7. In the years ahead more waste water treatment plants will be built, and more sludge produced. Often this is accompanied by the introduction of taxes and bans in order to stop the deposit of organic waste on landfill sites. As a result waste producers will step up their efforts to persuade agriculture to use larger quantities of sludge.

1.8. The precautionary principle, the "polluter pays" principle (PPP) and pro-active measures are the guidelines to be followed for reuse of nutrients for plants in agriculture. The ESC particularly stresses the importance of applying the PPP to sewage and to the production of sewage sludge.

1.9. Regulations should be adopted to promote new systems which facilitate the use of non-pollutant forms of waste in agriculture, and the recovery of valuable components in waste water and other organic waste.

1.10. Where organic waste is used as fertiliser, the role of the farmer is to select based on quality criteria the sort of sludge required in order to maintain and improve soil and food quality as well as to boost consumers' confidence.

2. Nutrients for plants are a key resource

2.1. The term "primary nutrient" is understood to mean phosphorus, potassium and nitrogen; the term "secondary nutrients" refers to calcium, magnesium, sodium and sulphur and "micro-nutrients" to boron, manganese, iron, zinc, copper, molybdenum and cobalt, which are essential in small quantities for plant growth. Most of these nutrients are metal ions(1).

2.2. Phosphorus is an element contained in the earth crust which is currently extracted from phosphorus-rich calcium phosphates. It is vital to plants and must be added to the soil if harvests are to produce optimum yield. The growing need for food over the next fifty years can clearly be expected to boost demand for supplies of phosphorus for crop cultivation purposes.

2.3. When new phosphorus deposits are first exploited, deeper galleries are dug and transport distances increase, with the result that the cost of phosphorus will rise. In this sense this element can become economically unviable and must be managed prudently by society and recycled with a view to promoting sustainable agriculture and a sustainable society.

2.4. There is also a solidarity dimension. The Member States will probably be able to afford to buy the phosphorus they need even in fifty years' time. When costs rise, the poorer countries are the ones which will have to content themselves with poorer quality and dwindling supplies.

2.5. Since phosphorus is an element (like metals such as mercury or cadmium), it is not degradable and will not disappear. Phosphorus contained in agri-foodstuffs will, unless recycled in agriculture, gradually spread to watercourses and groundwater. There is therefore a risk that phosphorus that is not returned to arable land will leak into the environment in a way which has hitherto not become apparent and cause environmental damage.

2.6. The same sustainability arguments hold good for potassium and secondary nutrients. Most micro-nutrients are considered to be usable as commercial fertilisers over a long period.

2.7. Nitrogen exists in large quantities in the air. Oil, gas or electricity corresponding to 1 litre oil per kg nitrogen is needed to turn ambient nitrogen gases into commercial fertiliser for crops. Nitrogen can also be fixed in plants which retain nitrogen. This requires the same amount of energy as factory processing and can be translated into requirements per hectare. Clover or lucerne crops, besides satisfying their own needs, fix 200 kg nitrogen per hectare, which is used by crops for a period of one or two years. Agriculture's energy consumption or use of crops for purposes of fixing nitrogen can therefore be reduced if nitrogen too can be restored along with organic waste. Further, the leakage of nitrogen from waste water plants as well as from agriculture needs to be stopped.

2.8. Organic substances can also be valuable for soil with a low humus content. In many cases the quantity of organic matter added through digested sludge is equivalent to several years' humus production from harvesting residues.

3. Metal content of soil and organic waste

3.1. Metals are extracted from concentrated deposits in the earth crust. Society makes extensive use of them in the form of building materials, in pipes, domestic and electronic appliances, motor vehicles, bridges, etc. They are evacuated as waste from the manufacture of products and as a result of becoming oxidised or detached from their structure through wear; sometimes, in connection with dismantling operations, in the form of leachate from landfills or exhaust gases from incineration, they spread through air or water into surface water. The communal sewage system collects these effluents and conducts metals to the waste water treatment system.

3.2. Technology-linked environments contain three times more cadmium, fifteen times more lead and twenty times more copper than arable land. When these metals erode, they must not be allowed to disperse into farmland, even if copper sometimes needs to be added to soil with a low copper content.

3.3. For the past twenty years, six to seven metals have been regularly analysed on the instructions of the authorities, as provided for in Directive 86/278/EEC. There are historical reasons, such as widespread industrial use, for controls on these metals. In recent decades a large number of new metals and other raw materials have come into use. They too should be checked in organic waste. Certain tests on the silver content of sludge and soil, show that levels in the soil have doubled within a period of between five and ten years in normal sludge spreads. The content of certain other metals (wolfram, gold, platinum, uranium) has doubled in the space of decades(2).

3.4. The Sludge Directive indicates metal concentration in mg metal/kg dry matter. This measurement criterion has certain limitations:

1) metal concentration can be diluted by mixing sludge from treated sewage with lime, sand, peat, animal manure etc., thereby obtaining concentrations below the mg metal/kg dry matter limit value;

2) the degree of decomposition/digestion(3) plays a role; a more digested or composted material will have a higher metal concentration per kg dry matter;

3) this measurement gives no indication of the element's origin. For instance, sludge and animal manure can have roughly the same metal concentration. In the former case, 95 % of these metals will stem from technology-related environments and, in the latter, most metals will derive from feedingstuffs and the farmer's own land.

3.5. A supplementary method of measurement is to indicate the content of certain metals in relation to the phosphorus level, e.g. in mg cadmium/kg phosphorus. This method offsets the shortcomings of the mg/kg measurement.

3.6. In the case of many old and new metals, little is known about soil chemistry or the effects of increasing concentrations in soil on plants, and especially on micro-organisms. The bio-availability of different metal-forms and the fact that in principle metals cannot be removed from the soil are important factors. Very small amounts leak or are absorbed by plants. Surveys show that soil health is affected if the original concentration is increased 2-5 times. In the short term (10-20 years), a single spreading of sludge probably poses no acute risk but, in the long term, the use of present qualities is not acceptable. However, there is little information about many metals and soil interactions. A relevant risk assessment is therefore not feasible. More research is needed in this area.

3.7. Two basic principles are used by scientists to determine the acceptable level of metal concentration in arable land:

1) Metals can be added to the soil up to a certain limit considered harmless to land, crops or human health. Often this is interpreted as implying that anything up to that limit is permissible. Once the arable land has reached this ceiling, spreading must move elsewhere;

2) Fertilisation must be reduced so that a balance is established between the introduction and loss of metals in the particular area concerned. Here the precautionary principle is interpreted more strictly, but a given increase in metal concentration in the soil - possibly 2 times (+100 %) over 10000 years can be accepted(4), i.e. an increase of 1,0 % every year over the first 10 years, 0,3 % over the next 90 years and 0,001 % over the last 9900 years.

3.8. Given the combination of ambient fallout, mineral fertilisers, feed additives, pesticides and sludge, some of the leeway for increased metal concentrations in soil has already been exhausted. However, in most cases we have little idea what these limits are.

3.9. Another factor to be considered is the optimum level of nutrients for plants in the soil. Normal fertilising adds primary nutrients but there is a risk of reducing the content of secondary nutrients and micronutrients in many types of soil. Organic waste contains the full range of nutrients and some extra micro-nutrients (metals) could be of value if applied to the soil in a controlled way.

3.10. In addition, climatic factors such as soil acidification and rapid decomposition of organic matter in warmer climates have an impact on bio-availability of both toxic metals and nutrients.

4. Hazardous organic substances

4.1. Hazardous organic substances occur more often in waste water and sludge from waste water treatment plants than in other types of organic waste. The reason is quite simply that they are often contained in effluents or, as a result of wear, are evacuated with the water collected in the sewage system. Three factors then determine which substances are contained in the sludge, and in what quantities:

- the activities connected with the sewage system (households, car washes, dentists, etc.);

- the materials used in buildings, installations, machines and textiles;

- the type of business, household and other use (e.g. what is washed down in domestic waste).

4.2. Though thousands of substances can be analysed, they are merely a fraction of the 100,000 or so substances contained in waste. Many of them decompose during processing in the waste water treatment plant, while new substances are probably being created at the same time.

4.3. Only for a few of these substances the environmental impact is known. However, even for those the combined impact is not clearly established(5). Any risk assessment will therefore inevitably be incomplete as it is based on what we know of these few individual substances.

4.4. Criteria for establishing whether an organic substance is undesirable include: lengthy decomposition, accumulation in the food chain or in certain organisms or high toxic content or a hormonal effect in water.

4.5. For purposes of studying the content of undesirable organic substances, indicators can be selected which identify chemical-intensive sources of waste, or indicate the quantity of certain undesirable substances.

4.6. Another alternative is to construct models for the undesirable substance's behaviour in nature. Methods for analysing such substances can be developed, and the presence of these substances in sludge measured. One component in this methodology is also to establish whether substances can be absorbed by plants.

4.7. Another method of measuring the potential effect of chemicals is to use biological methods, e.g. to show the dioxin or hormonal effects of all substances in the sample examined.

4.8. There may be interactions between different metals and organic substances which can accentuate or weaken a toxic effect.

4.9. Substances with undesirable properties must not be permitted in organic waste used in agriculture.

4.10. Methods of analysis for organic and inorganic pollutants need to be developed.

5. Possible measures regarding metals and hazardous organic substances

5.1. In order to reduce the quantity of undesirable substances, water from certain sources of waste must be closed off or purified before release into the sewage network. Such sources include industrial activities, run-off water and leachates from landfills and car maintenance plants.

5.2. Another step is to curb the use of hazardous substances for domestic or industrial purposes, for instance by boosting the proportion of eco-label products on the market and facilitating the consumer's choice. Progress on the EU's policy and rules on chemical products needs to be speeded up so that manufacturers document all ingredients and replace unsuitable or undocumented products by a set deadline. Products containing substances that could damage the environment when used normally must be removed from sale. This is a prerequisite for better quality both for sludge and for water rejected from waste water treatment plants, as well as for consumers who unknowingly use such products in the home.

5.3. A third way to reduce pollutants in organic liquid waste is to introduce separated systems, and so avoid mixing organic waste with other forms of waste and consequently deal with each component individually.

6. Contamination risks

6.1. Waste containing faecal matter and other organic waste includes pathogenic organisms such as bacteria, viruses and parasites. The increasing concentration of people in urban areas and of livestock on farm holdings, combined with greater mobility of people and goods, could facilitate the spread of diseases. The risks affect ecosystems, vegetation, livestock and human beings. For certain diseases, there is a risk of contagion between, for instance, wild and domestic animals, or between domestic animals and human beings.

6.2. In order to be able to carry out a qualified risk assessment, a closer study is also needed of the occupational hygiene aspect with specific reference to waste water plant workers and users of the sludge.

6.3. All organic waste must be carefully inspected and treated appropriately so as to avoid contamination. The need for preventive measures and control has increased.

6.4. Most European countries have rules providing for waste processing, periods of quarantine or bans on certain forms of use with a view to restricting exposure of the public to disease. Animal protection standards are often less stringent despite the possibility of certain forms of contagion between animals and humans (zoonoses).

6.5. Treatment requirements may vary depending on the use made of the waste. Generally speaking, the data available for assessing the risk of exposure to contamination through different forms of organic waste are, despite numerous studies, still inadequate.

6.6. Particular attention should be focused on waste from individual houses in rural areas. Existing toilet waste disposal installations are often ineffective in reducing pathogenic substances. Fairly simple measures are needed to eliminate or heavily reduce risks.

6.7. The use or elimination of waste from urban areas must not involve any risk of epidemics in people, livestock or wild animals. Farmers suffer considerable financial losses when disease strikes their herds. If organic waste from urban areas is to be used in agriculture, the product must be safe, particularly with reference to salmonella and E. Coli O157. For certain diseases, that also presupposes that waste may not be used on arable land or as fertiliser, and that it must not be landfilled until the risk of contamination has been eliminated.

7. Consumer confidence in agriculture

7.1. Consumers are entitled to demand, and receive guarantees, that the foodstuffs on sale comply with established food safety regulations. Such guarantees should be provided by the producer and the seller of the food.

7.2. The consumer's evaluation of food quality plays a decisive role in the value of such products and determines which products he/she chooses.

7.3. The food market is sensitive to alarms regarding various risks and high standards of food safety must be guaranteed so as to foster confidence. This also influences farming methods, and eventually the use of sewage sludge. Farmers in many Member States often need to prove to food industries that only inputs acceptable to authorities and the market have been used.

7.4. Whether or not the use of sludge is acceptable will be influenced by the food products' measurable quality but will above all depend on the general public's confidence in the use of sludge in agriculture and in the waste water system's capacity to supply non-pollutant nutrients.

7.5. In most Member States there is an ongoing debate on whether it is appropriate to use sludge and other organic forms of waste on arable food-producing land. There are a number of reasons for the low acceptance. The sludge contains a number of pollutants. Knowledge about the function of sewage systems, the influence of individual human activities (see 4.1) and the need to return nutrients in agriculture is generally low. The problem of pollutants in sludge and related contamination issues are often not properly dealt with by sludge producers and the authorities. Often sludge management nowadays is a question of disposal rather than a focused action to meet customer needs as expressed by farmers, the food industry or consumers.

7.6. Possible actions are: (i) identification of issues based on the present level of knowledge available in the market, (ii) clear targets for short and long term development of sludge quality and systems performance, (iii) appropriate management regarding actions to develop product quality and certification systems (controlled by a third party) and thereby (iv) increase management transparency. Often the terms "reuse" or "re-circulation" of sludge are used. In fact only nutrients derived from plants and organic matter are of farm origin. Appropriate legislation could support the process of achieving cleaner organic waste and increased confidence in agricultural use.

7.7. The Council Regulation 2092/91 EEC(6) on "organic production of agricultural products" does not allow sewage sludge or synthetic fertilisers to be used on organic farms. Source separated household waste is allowed after treatment. Organic agriculture will benefit more than conventional agriculture from reuse of non-pollutant nutrients derived from organic waste. Organic producers try to satisfy consumers' needs and, therefore, they are more sensitive to public acceptance. As a result, organic production also helps to improve soil protection.

8. Respective areas of responsibility

8.1. Different players have different responsibilities for maintaining the quality of organic waste. In the home it is possible to sort waste selectively and to use the sewage system only for bodily waste and for washing and washing-up water. Consumers are also responsible for opting only to buy and use "green" chemical products in the home. The chemical industry is responsible for manufacturing such products and the business sector for marketing them. The materials used for water pipes (copper), domestic appliances and water tanks are the responsibility of the building sector and manufacturers of "white goods".

8.2. The chosen waste and sewage treatment strategy will determine whether it is possible to separate the different waste flows. Here town planners, decisionmakers and building entrepreneurs are primarily responsible. Urban areas have the task of channelling non-pollutant nutrients back into agriculture.

8.3. Farmers are responsible for maintaining and improving soil quality and for producing adequate supplies of food providing value for money. Their contribution is to ensure that agriculture is a key player in the nutritional chain and to specify the quality required for agricultural use of organic waste.

8.4. For farmers to be able to shoulder their responsibility, the composition and origin of the organic waste need to be specified. Furthermore, systems for tracing sludge use, reliable testing methods and permanent monitoring systems need to be developed.

8.5. The ESC stresses the general use of the "polluter pays principle"; environmental costs must be internalised via information, voluntary undertakings, eco-labelling and economic incentives and disincentives so that development can be speeded up.

9. Commission Report on the implementation of Community waste legislation(7)

9.1. In its Report on the situation regarding implementation of Community waste legislation, the Commission states that the use of sludge on arable land is considered to be the most environment-friendly option. and that no reports have been received of damage to people, animals or crops caused by the use of sludge on farm land.

9.2. The ESC does not agree with the Commission's intention and is critical of this over-simplified approach.

9.3. As this own-initiative opinion shows, there is every reason to have doubts about the use of sludge on farm land in view of its present quality. Few of the metals which pollute sludge have been analysed. The metals concentrations allowed in sludge are far too high for sustainable use. Certain sludge spreads which are accepted in the Sludge Directive involve a doubling in the metal concentration in soil after one or two single spreadings. Too little is known about all the organic pollutants mixed into sewage sludge, or about the health risks. A number of research surveys also challenge current limit values (e.g. cadmium in foodstuffs) and indicate that the risks to human health could be greater than researchers have thought to date. The same holds good for dioxins.

9.4. If use in agriculture is preferable to all other disposal methods, that shows that society needs clear targets and strong actions to improve the situation.

9.5. The Report shows no recognition of the problems and does not spell out the need for healthy soil to be able to produce healthy food for thousands of years to come.

9.6. The Report indicates that the use of sludge is regarded with increasing suspicion, though it states that this distrust is not scientifically justified. According to the "precautionary principle", action should be taken even if sound scientific proof of the danger is not available.

9.7. In the ESC's view, the decisive factor for agriculture and the food industry is consumers' confidence in their raw materials and products. So the potential use of sewage sludge in agriculture is to be decided by farmers and consumers.

10. Regulatory aspects

10.1. On 2 February 2000, the Commission presented its "Communication on the precautionary principle"(8). The Committee wishes the revised Directive in question to take into account the guidelines of this recent Communication. The principal purpose of the amended "Sludge" Directive should be to tailor measures more closely to the Commission's stated aims regarding sustainability and curbing pollution.

10.2. The Committee wishes to see evidence of an integrated approach, as the Commission has recently tabled several documents referring to a series of principles and guidelines governing the future of its legislation, also applicable to the subject under analysis. The Committee feels that the area of waste management is of particular importance; hence, it believes that this specific piece of legislation could serve as a platform to integrate all these recent initiatives and to demonstrate their utility and significance. Preferably the amended "Sludge" Directive should encompass different forms of treated effluent and non-effluent organic waste, including mixed sewage sludge from urban areas and food industry and households waste.

10.3. The definitions need to specify that all effluents from waste water treatment plants and other urban effluent waste are governed either by the amended "Sludge" Directive, or the forthcoming Water Framework Directive or some other Directive for digested or composted organic matter which the Commission seems to have in the pipeline. The latter might also include treated non-effluent organic waste.

10.4. However, to ensure the most suitable use of nutrients from organic waste, suppliers must clearly indicate its origin, the substances that have been introduced and the processing which it has undergone. If the result is sludge, the choice between digestion or compost is of less importance for the purposes of this directive. (The present definition of sludge, is purely technical and unrelated to the quality of the raw material.)

10.5. If the planned new directive on "compost" is to be introduced, it should be reserved for selected source separated organic waste. Mixed urban waste water or sewage sludge from such water should be regulated by the amended "Sludge" Directive.

10.6. To avoid legal uncertainties due to the time gap between the amended "Sludge" Directive and the introduction of a new directive for digests and composts, the ESC prefers all treated organic waste to be covered by the amended Sludge Directive until further Community legislation is introduced.

10.7. Water is protected under the forthcoming Water Framework Directive. In addition, the ESC highlights the absence of any Community minimum requirements regarding "soil protection" and urges the Commission to trigger procedures to this end.

10.8. On 9 February 2000 the Commission published its White Paper on Environmental Liability(9). In this document, in particular under point 4.2.2, waste management appears amongst the activities covered by the objectives described with respect to health or property damage and contaminated sites. As these activities are to be defined, the means to incorporate the plans for amending Directive 86/278/EEC should also be outlined and the Commission should describe and define this aspect to all stakeholders concerned.

10.9. Being aware that DG SANCO is going to submit its own legislative proposal on Animal Waste (draft Regulation) shortly, the Committee believes that the Commission should define and inform all stakeholders about the issues to be covered by each initiative. The ESC feels that overlapping should be avoided as it could lead to confusion at implementation level. Within this context, a practicable example of eventual confusion is sludge produced by slaughterhouses.

10.10. Taking into account the data provided by the "Commission Report on the implementation of Community Waste Legislation"(10), for the period 1995-1997, the Committee would like to express its concerns regarding the level of implementation of Directive 86/278/EEC. It would like to see the Commission taking action against Member States in cases of failure to comply with the current provisions, as well as regarding their obligations arising from Article 17 of this Directive, as amended (i.e. to draw up every three years a consolidated report on the use of sludge in agriculture). Such measures are the only reliable way to ensure appropriate implementation of the provisions of a directive.

10.10.1. On the other hand, the Commission has published its "Seventeenth Annual Report on monitoring the application of Community law (1999)"(11) which, despite references to "waste" legislation, contains no data regarding the Directive in question, thus triggering questions regarding the current state of play and the level of EU surveillance on this matter.

10.11. Among the provisions governing the future regime, the Committee wishes to see the establishment of monitoring mechanisms, i.e. risk management supervised by Commission services. The results of such surveillance should be published on a periodic basis (every two years) and the Commission should report on its follow-up actions at the same time. In other terms, the Committee wishes to seek reassurance that the Commission will install the necessary provisions to ensure efficient monitoring of the future regime in this area and that, at the same time, transparency will be guaranteed. Equally, such a surveillance system should allow for a review of the existing provisions in the light of any scientific developments. To this end, the Commission should take measures to properly define the competent national authority monitoring the provisions of this Directive in order to render it known and accountable.

10.12. The Committee welcomes the Commission's proposal to establish work links with the "Committee of representatives of the Member States responsible for the implementation and monitoring of sludge management". However, the ESC underlines the importance of establishing defined work links between the committee in question and the Commission's scientific bodies as well, in order to guarantee proper risk assessment on an overall basis which is currently not adequately addressed.

10.13. The Committee would like to acquire data ensuring proper evaluation of the credibility and comprehensive character of the scientific studies used by the Commission services in this context. The ESC wishes to express its concern over the lack of direct involvement and positive contribution of the European Environmental Agency (EEA) in Copenhagen.

10.14. Normal values regarding quality and volume for different types of effluent and non-effluent waste should be collected from various countries (e.g. toilet water, digested residues sorted at source, waste from food industry and mixed sludge from sewage plants) to make it easy to compare qualities of waste of different origin. The EEA should, together with national authorities, play an important role in the development of an EU wide monitoring system and data compilation.

11. Economic aspects

11.1. Environmental costs are triggered when the costs of environmental damage and preventive or remedial actions are internalised in society. Here a case will often be evaluated in terms of the costs of repairing the damage (e.g. cleaning up land or restoring biological diversity). Many discharges can be suspected of producing long-term environmental effects but these discharges are often accepted before damage can be proven. In such situations the precautionary principle applies. Clear legislation is required in support of this principle.

11.2. Human activity is often linked with stable infrastructure (energy supply, traffic networks and sewage systems). It is an expensive matter to make speedy changes in such systems since their economic lifespan can be very long and, in order to manage local development, society needs to take a long-term approach and targets must be easy to quantify in a stage-by-stage process.

11.3. In the short term, the sludge produced must be dealt with. Use in agriculture is among the least expensive options. The alternative is soil production, landfilling, incineration or some type of chemical treatment such as hydrolysis or fractionation. In addition to soil production and landfilling, the alternatives involve fairly large investments and the costs can be three times higher per tonne than the cheaper options. However, if sludge is to be used in agriculture, the volume of pollutants must be sharply reduced and sludge must be treated to become hygienic. Society will have to pay this bill too.

11.4. In the longer term it will be possible to build sewage systems which do not mix the fractions (or flows) containing the bulk of nutrients with others which add metals and pollutant organic substances. Such systems can be developed for use in new and updated installations. To keep costs down it is an advantage if new systems can make use as far as possible of the existing sewage system and treatment plant infrastructure. In some Member States such sorting systems are being developed for human urine and toilet water.

11.5. It can also be observed that sustainable sewage treatment invariably presupposes a reduction in the volume of waste and that the waste produced is sorted so that it can be re-used in an environment-friendly way. Though it will cost a lot to change the sewage system along these lines, sorting systems will probably in the long run prove less expensive in global terms.

11.6. Since the EU's aim is to create a sustainable society, decision-makers in the towns and regions must frame short-term plans for the disposal of sludge currently produced along with plans for long-term conversion of the sewage system so as to be able to channel nutrients of black (toilet) water quality back into agriculture or forestry production. (Black water is human excreta, paper and water. No pollutants are added to the waste).

11.7. In the ESC's view, higher priority needs to be given to a sustainable environment and society must shoulder the cost of ecological conversion. Investments in development should be facilitated by the Commission. Environmental costs must be internalised(12) by the market and the community.

12. Conclusion

12.1. Nutrients for plants are transported to urban areas through agri-foodstuffs. Nutrients remain in food waste and toilet water and can be channelled back into agriculture without added pollutants so that agriculture and society can be sustainable.

12.2. Over the next 10000 years a doubled content of most metals in soils might be acceptable. That means that sludge can be used when the amount of metals added in the next 10-20 years does not exceed 10-15 % and that it is to be reduced to almost zero within a generation. Hazardous organic substances are in the long run to be avoided all together. A model for risk assessment and methods for analysing the effects of key chemicals in biological systems is needed now. Use of sludge in agriculture must not generate increased risks of contamination in agriculture or among the general public.

12.3. Little advantage is taken of important nutrients in waste water such as nitrogen and potassium. However, 90 % of the phosphorus content is captured in the sludge. People are sceptical not only about sludge quality but also about the capacity of the sewage system in its present state to purify sewage, and hence to contribute to a sustainable society.

12.4. As a result, doubts regarding the use of sludge in agriculture exist in most countries. Often there is little understanding from sludge producers and authorities regarding this problem. The questions need to be identified and proper targets and actions should be defined in order to change the situation.

12.5. EU consumers are entitled to demand safe food and to influence the production methods and resources used in agriculture.

12.6. Many groups, including the chemical industry, consumers, sludge producers, building firms, planners and decisionmakers, are responsible for ensuring that society develops in a way that allows nutrients to be recycled. Agriculture has the task of maintaining soil quality and bears ultimate responsibility for what is spread over arable land.

12.7. The environmental impact cost from any use or disposal of sludge should be internalised in the costs for water use and pollutant products.

12.8. In the ESC's view, agriculture should in the long run only use nutrients from organic waste kept separate from other pollutant waste which increases the metal content or introduces hazardous organic substances.

12.9. Hence the use of sludge as agricultural fertiliser is highly dubious, and in most cases manifestly unsuitable unless the sludge and the system delivering it are greatly improved.

13. Recommendations

13.1. The revised Directive should indicate clearly that the overall long term aim is to channel back non-pollutant nutrients from the Community's sewage into agriculture.

13.2. It must specify that the precautionary principle and PPP are applicable in evaluating sources connected up with the sewage system and the production and use of sewage sludge.

13.3. The revised amended "Sludge" Directive must adopt a holistic approach to all effluent waste from waste water treatment plants and other urban waste sources. It should preferably encompass all waste and discharges which are not covered by the forthcoming Water Framework Directive(13).

13.4. Though water protection legislation exists, there is currently no Community minimum requirements regarding soil protection. The ESC urges the Commission to draw up such legislation.

13.5. The origin of waste, the substances introduced into it and the processes it has undergone must be reported to the authorities and to the user.

13.6. As a back-up to the mg/kg measurement, the quantity of certain metals could be indicated in relation to the volume of phosphorus (e.g. mg cadmium/kg phosphorus). This measurement offsets shortcomings of the mg/kg criterion.

13.7. Responsibility for environmental damage caused by sludge use should be specified in the Directive.

13.8. The national authorities should report regularly on the use made of sludge, its quality and the quality of other types of waste so as to help authorities and users to make both national and international comparisons. The EEA has a natural role to play in collating such information to be notified by the Member States.

13.9. Systems for tracing sludge use, reliable testing methods and permanent monitoring systems need to be developed. Ways in which the Member States manage risks connected with the use of organic waste should be reported and published on a regular basis..

13.10. The ESC stresses the need for the waste committee to liaise closely with the Commission's scientific services in order to ensure objective risk evaluation.

13.11. Since one of the EU's aims is to create a sustainable society, greater priority must be given to environmental sustainability and steps must be taken to facilitate investment in new technologies that reduce the environmental impact of organic waste management in general, and the re-use of non-pollutant nutrients in particular.

13.12. The amended Sludge Directive should state that metal content in sludge can only be used when the amount of metals added in the next 10-20 years does not exceed 10-15 %, to be reduced to almost zero within a generation. Hazardous organic substances are in the long run to be avoided all together. A model for risk assessment and methods for analysing the effects of key chemicals in biological systems is needed now. Use of sludge in agriculture must not generate increased risks of contamination in agriculture or among the general public.

13.13. The Commission is requested to consult the ESC in its future work on the Sludge Directive and other regulations governing the production and management of organic waste.

Brussels, 19 October 2000.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke Frerichs

(1) Ref.: CEN standard on fertilisers EN 28157.

(2) Ref.: Swedish EPA autumn 2000.

(3) The greater the degree of digestion, the smaller the volume of sludge.

(4) Ref.: Chemical Inspectorate, Sweden, May 2000.

(5) Ref.: Chemical Inspectorate, Sweden.

(6) OJ L 198, 22.7.1991, p. 1-15.

(7) COM(1999) 752 final.

(8) COM(2000) 1 final.

(9) COM(2000) 66 final.

(10) COM(2000) 752 final.

(11) COM(2000) 92 final.

(12) "Internalised" is the term normally used for consciously incorporating environmental costs in a calculation or a price. The cost for environmental damage should be easy to follow. "Assimilate" relates more to absorbing the cost. This will happen anyway sooner or later. Often too late and at very high cost.

(13) COM(97) 49 final.