I see no evidence that the cited report was suppressed. Either way, the UK water sector’s Chemical Investigation Programme (CIP) gives transparent, open-source analysis of all these substances in #biosolids. It is an infinitely more reliable and representative resource ukwir.org/sign-up-and-...
Again, in fairness, it requires expertise in this area to fully unpick these caveats. Other studies have shown the opposite & that #microplastics from applied #biosolids can be blown away by wind (not great of course, but shows the complexity of this topic) www.acs.org/pressroom/pr...
This study is based on frozen samples of soils & liquid #SewageSludge from trial plots in the mid-90’s. App rates & #biosolids incorportation depth are not representative of modern 🇬🇧 #biosolids use. The #Sludge itself was intentionally modified to exceed regulated contaminant levels…
Its true that this study says this. However, its likely that the parameters of the risk assessment are unreflective of the #biosolids application rates used in 🇬🇧 #agriculture & likely to substantially overstate the level of risk. In fairness, this requires a level of expertise to unpick…
I don’t know who ‘we’ refers to but the idea that this is some kind of dodgy secret is misleading. The treatment of trade effluent arriving by sewer is regulated under the Water Industry Act. The treatment of commercial waste arriving by tanker is a fully permitted activity…
This is claim is baseless. The transfer of commercial tankered waste and statutory requirements on all involved is covered under Duty of Care regulations and is a fully permitted activity…
This claim isn’t evidenced but is almost certainly untrue. Official gov stats show that, on average, just 1.6% of British farmland recieves #biosolids each year www.gov.uk/government/s... …
This almost certainly isn’t a photo of #SewageSludge or #biosolids. #Biosolids in 🇬🇧 are almost exclusively applied as a solid known as ‘cake’ (tasty), not fired over fences using a rain gun…
For my own sanity, a little perspective on some claims made in this article…🧵
Also, please please please find an accompanying image that actually depicts #biosolids being spread - not slurry being fired over a fence!!
If we couple this fact to our knowledge that about only 1.6% of 🇬🇧 farmland recieves #biosolids per year, the alarmism begins to feel quite unjustified and frankly undermines the legitimate concerns over the possible risks of #biosolids use in #agriculture
Taking the best available data for 🇬🇧 #biosolids (CIP3 data), and assuming app rates based on regulated metals, zinc would limit #biosolids app rate to c.80 t/ha (of dry solids, based on median result for zinc). But this is about 16x a typical app rate based on typical #biosolids N content…
The main issue is the assumed application rate. The ‘Smart form’ assumes app rates based on the regulated limits for metals in the #biosolids. But this isn’t what actually sets the legal app rate limit in practice. This is instead set by the Nitrogen (N) content of #biosolids…
The government research cited here indeed suggests possible issues with the support of crop growth resulting from ‘pollutants’ in #biosolids. However, the research outcomes in this instance are basically nonsense and here’s why…
The problem with these articles is that they continue to rely on sources that are not reflective of #biosolids use in 🇬🇧 #agriculture. While the concerns are real, and legitimate, the level of alarm conveyed is therefore disproportionate 🧵
Before digging down further - two things as asides: 1) the comment about impact on soil health isn’t supported by any evidence here, 2) it is very unlikely that #biosolids would ever be spread on the same field over 20 sequential annual applications…but neither of these are the fundemental issue…
First, here is the section indicating that soil samples only need to be tested for metals every 20 years (true) and that, on this basis, annual applications over 20 years could impact the soil’s ability to support crop growth…
PFPrA was in every sample from the adjacent farms, but it is not present in the [biosolids] sample. The PFPrA signature in the ponds, wells, and soils does not match what PEER reported for the December 2022 [biosolids] sample which contained no PFPrA. PFPrA data suggest another PFAS source.
An independent expert report comissioned by Synagro, who produce the #biosolids, confirms my misgivings about the role of biosolids in #PFAS contmination of local soil and water in this case - particularly with respect to the specific ultrashort chain PFAS - PFPrA www.synagro.com/2025/03/18/s...
Based on the best available CIP3 data, some examples 🇬🇧 #biosolids may exceed the 31 ppb limit on #PFOS, although most would not. No #biosolids tested in CIP3 contained #PFOA above the LoD of 1 ppb.
For #biosolids use in #agriculture, this is the key table. Its a bit complicated as first glance, & read-across to the 🇬🇧 context is tricky. However, only ‘restricted use’ would likely apply in 🇬🇧 as we have restricted application rates.
Australia’s final #PFAS National Environmental Management Plan (NEMP) v3.0 has been published. This provides a framework that places numerical limits for certain #PFAS in #biosolids depending on the end use, including use in #agriculture www.dcceew.gov.au/environment/...
AtkinsRéalis leading investigation into removal of #microplastics and other substances from #SewageSludge & #Biosolids by Advanced Thermal Conversion (ATC) technologies ukwir.org/resume?objec...
The soil & water is dominated by #PFPrA, an ultrashort chain #PFAS that isn’t reported as detected in the #biosolids. Typically, longer chain #PFAS like #PFOS are most common to #biosolids. Based on this, it feels like #biosolids isn’t the whole story here imho
Unsure how this story has developed as its behind a paywall. But from the data I’ve seen, the profile of #PFAS chemicals found in the water & soil isn’t well aligned to the #biosolids in question peer.org/wp-content/u...
100%. If the bath’s overflowing turn off the tap, don’t bail out the water.
I’ve not had a chance to look at the actual model but 1 ppb is the LoD, right? So they would have made it even lower if they could? Forget biosolids, good luck recycling any materials to land if that’s the direction of travel.
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6697b4...
Self correction - in fact just 1.1% of 🇬🇧 farmland sown in 2023 recieved #biosolids. Hardly vast swathes.
Official 🇬🇧 stats show that #biosolids make up just 3% of all organic materials spread on farmland. The vast majority is slurry and Farmyard Manure from cattle.
