Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on "The revision of Council Directive 86/278/EEC on the use of sewage sludge in agriculture"
Date: 2000-10-19
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: agricultural waste, environmental protection, metal pollution, organic fertiliser, waste management, water treatment

16.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 14/141

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

1.

Background

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 10 000 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, improve-
ment 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.

1.1.
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.

The most important task of waste water treatment
1.4.
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.

C 14/142

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

16.1.2001

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.

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.

1.6.
Researchers and environmental and farmers’ organis-
ations 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’ prin-
ciple (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.

Regulations should be adopted to promote new sys-
1.9.
tems 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

The term ‘primary nutrient’

2.1.
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).

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

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.

Since phosphorus is an element (like metals such as
2.5.
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.

16.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 14/143

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.

For the past twenty years, six to seven metals have
3.3.
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 (1).

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)

3)

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

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.

In the case of many old and new metals, little is known
3.6.
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
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.

that

Two basic principles are used by scientists to determine

3.7.
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 estab-
lished 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 10 000 years can be accepted (3), 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
9 900 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.

Another factor to be considered is the optimum level
3.9.
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.

(1) Ref.: Swedish EPA autumn 2000.
(2) The greater the degree of digestion, the smaller the volume of

sludge.

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

C 14/144

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

16.1.2001

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.

4.7.
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. 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 (house-

holds, 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 (1). Any risk assessment will
therefore inevitably be incomplete as it is based on what we
know of these few individual substances.

Criteria for establishing whether an organic substance
4.4.
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.

(1) Ref.: Chemical Inspectorate, Sweden.

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

Substances with undesirable properties must not be

4.9.
permitted in organic waste used in agriculture.

4.10. Methods of analysis for organic and inorganic pol-
lutants need to be developed.

5.

Possible measures regarding metals and hazardous
organic substances

In order to reduce the quantity of undesirable substanc-
5.1.
es, 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 contain-
ing 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

16.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 14/145

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.

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.

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.

The use or elimination of waste from urban areas must
6.7.
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.

The food market

7.3.
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.

In most Member States there is an ongoing debate on
7.5.
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. Consumer confidence in agriculture

7.1.
Consumers are entitled to demand, and receive guaran-
tees, 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.

7.6.
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.

C 14/146

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

16.1.2001

The Council Regulation 2092/91 EEC (1) on ‘organic
7.7.
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’
they are more sensitive to public
needs and,
acceptance. As a result, organic production also helps to
improve soil protection.

therefore,

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.

The ESC stresses the general use of

the ‘polluter
8.5.
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 Com-

munity waste legislation (2)

In its Report on the situation regarding implementation
9.1.
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.

The ESC does not agree with the Commission’s inten-

9.2.
tion 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.

The Report shows no recognition of the problems and
9.5.
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.

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

(2) COM(1999) 752 final.

16.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 14/147

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.

10.5.
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. Regulatory aspects

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.

10.1.
On 2 February 2000, the Commission presented
its ‘Communication on the precautionary principle’ (1). 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.

10.7. 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 pro-
cedures to this end.

10.2.
The Committee wishes to see evidence of an inte-
grated 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
it
believes that this specific piece of legislation could serve as a
platform to integrate all these recent initiatives and to demon-
strate their utility and significance. Preferably the amended
‘Sludge’ Directive should encompass different forms of treated
including mixed
effluent and non-effluent organic waste,
sewage sludge from urban areas and food industry and
households waste.

is of particular importance; hence,

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.)

10.8.
On 9 February 2000 the Commission published its
White Paper on Environmental Liability (2). 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 implemen-
tation level. Within this context, a practicable example of
eventual confusion is sludge produced by slaughterhouses.

Taking into account

10.10.
the data provided by the
‘Commission Report on the implementation of Community
Waste Legislation’ (3), for the period 1995-1997, the Com-
mittee 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.

(1) COM(2000) 1 final.

(2) COM(2000) 66 final.
(3) COM(2000) 752 final.

C 14/148

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

16.1.2001

10.10.1.
On the other hand, the Commission has published
its ‘Seventeenth Annual Report on monitoring the application
of Community law (1999)’ (1) 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 pro-
visions of this Directive in order to render it known and
accountable.

10.12.
The Committee welcomes the Commission’s pro-
posal to establish work links with the ‘Committee of represen-
tatives of the Member States responsible for the implemen-
tation 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 charac-
ter 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.

(1) COM(2000) 92 final.

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 infrastruc-
ture (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.

In the short term, the sludge produced must be dealt
11.3.
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.

It can also be observed that sustainable sewage
11.5.
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.

16.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 14/149

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).

In the ESC’s view, higher priority needs to be given to
11.7.
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 (1) by the market and the community.

12. Conclusion

As a result, doubts regarding the use of sludge in
12.4.
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, con-
sumers,
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.

The environmental

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

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.

12.8.
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.

12.2.
Over the next 10 000 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.

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

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

13. Recommendations

The revised Directive should indicate clearly that the
long term aim is to channel back non-pollutant

13.1.
overall
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 (2).

(2) COM(97) 49 final.

C 14/150

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

16.1.2001

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.
sludge use should be specified in the Directive.

Responsibility for environmental damage caused by

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.

Systems

13.9.
reliable testing
methods and permanent monitoring systems need to be
developed. Ways in which the Member States manage risks

tracing sludge use,

for

Brussels, 19 October 2000.

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.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS