Processed manure products have the potential to substitute chemical fertilizers and the use of these products may increase resource efficiency in the food system and decrease emissions of ammonia (NH3) and greenhouse gasses (GHG). The yields of maize and grass, as well as emissions, have been determined from a processed manure product: liquid ammonium sulfate from nitrogen stripping animal manure (AS), in comparison to a regular mineral fertilizer, calcium ammonium nitrate (CAN), in a greenhouse experiment and a field demonstration using a sandy and a clay soil. NH3 emissions were determined by comparing AS with a dairy manure as a reference. The yield of both crops, their nitrogen nutrient use efficiency (NUE), and nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions were not significantly different, while NH3 emission was lower from AS compared to the dairy manure. As a side-effect, the sulfur (S) contents of the grass in the fields fertilized with AS were much higher than in the non-fertilized control. We conclude that AS, produced here with a pH < 5.5, can be used as an alternative for CAN in Dutch dairy systems, or similar other system, if S leaching losses do not pose a problem for the environment. Meanwhile, care should be taken not to exceed S in feed above toxic levels for ruminants.

Plants require 14 nutrient elements in specific amounts for growth and development, in addition to carbon dioxide, water, and photosynthetic active radiation. The most limiting nutrient elements are nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. This chapter briefly summarizes the driving forces of nutrient cycling and the changes in global nutrient flows and balances in agricultural systems and food systems, with a focus on nitrogen and phosphorus in food production-consumption systems. The nitrogen cycle is a most complex nutrient cycle. Nitrogen exists in different forms, most of which are biologically, photochemically, or radiatively active. The phosphorus cycle serves as an example for the cycling of "immobile" elements, such as metals, cadmium, and magnesium. The availability of phosphorus in most soils limits crop production around the world. The specialization and agglomeration of food production systems was facilitated by transnational corporations.

The number of publications on environmental footprint indicators has been growing rapidly, but with limited efforts to integrate different footprints into a coherent framework. Such integration is important for comprehensive understanding of environmental issues, policy formulation and assessment of trade-offs between different environmental concerns. Here, we systematize published footprint studies and define a family of footprints that can be used for the assessment of environmental sustainability. We identify overlaps between different footprints and analyse how they relate to the nine planetary boundaries and visualize the crucial information they provide for local and planetary sustainability. In addition, we assess how the footprint family delivers on measuring progress towards Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), considering its ability to quantify environmental pressures along the supply chain and relating them to the water-energy-food-ecosystem (WEFE) nexus and ecosystem services. We argue that the footprint family is a flexible framework where particular members can be included or excluded according to the context or area of concern. Our paper is based upon a recent workshop bringing together global leading experts on existing environmental footprint indicators.

ADVERTISEMENT RETURN TO ISSUEPREVViewpointNEXTNew Training to Meet the Global Phosphorus ChallengeKasper Reitzel*Kasper ReitzelUniversity of Southern Denmark, Department of Biology, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense M, Denmark*E-mail: [email protected]More by Kasper Reitzel, William W. BennettWilliam W. BennettUniversity of Southern Denmark, Department of Biology, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense M, DenmarkMore by William W. Bennett, Nils BergerNils BergerEuroChem Agro GmbH, Reichskanzler-Müller-Str. 23, 68165 Mannheim, GermanyMore by Nils Berger, Will J. BrownlieWill J. BrownlieCentre for Ecology & Hydrology in Edinburgh, Penicuik, Midlothian, Scotland, U.K. EH26 0QBMore by Will J. Brownlie, Sander BruunSander BruunUniversity of Copenhagen, Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences, Thorvaldsensvej 40, 1871 Frederiksberg C, DenmarkMore by Sander Bruun, Morten L. ChristensenMorten L. ChristensenAalborg University, Department of Chemistry and Bioscience, Frederiks Bajers Vej 7H, 9220 Aalborg, DenmarkMore by Morten L. Christensen, Dana CordellDana CordellUniversity of Technology Sydney, Institute for Sustainable Futures, PO Box 123 Broadway New South Wales 2007, AustraliaMore by Dana Cordell, Kimo van DijkKimo van DijkEuropean Sustainable Phosphorus Platform, 8 Avenue du Dirgeable, 1170 Bruxelles, BelgiumMore by Kimo van Dijk, Sara EgemoseSara EgemoseUniversity of Southern Denmark, Department of Biology, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense M, DenmarkMore by Sara Egemose, Herbert EignerHerbert EignerAGRANA Research & Innovation Center GmbH, Josef Reitherstraße 21-23, 3430 Tulln an der Donau, AustriaMore by Herbert Eigner, Ronnie N. GludRonnie N. GludUniversity of Southern Denmark, Department of Biology, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense M, DenmarkMore by Ronnie N. Glud, Outi GrönforsOuti GrönforsKemira Oyj, R&D and Technology EMEA, Water treatment, Luoteisrinne 2, FI-02270 Espoo, FinlandMore by Outi Grönfors, Ludwig HermannLudwig HermannProman Management GmbH, Weingartenstrasse 92, 2214 Auersthal, AustriaMore by Ludwig Hermann, Sabine HouotSabine HouotFrench National Institute for Agricultural Research, INRA UMR, ECOSYS, Route de la Ferme, F-78850 Thiverval-Grignon, FranceMore by Sabine Houot, Michael HupferMichael HupferLeibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Department of Chemical Analytics and Biogeochemistry, Müggelseedamm 301, 12587 Berlin, GermanyMore by Michael Hupfer, Brent JacobsBrent JacobsUniversity of Technology Sydney, Institute for Sustainable Futures, PO Box 123 Broadway New South Wales 2007, AustraliaMore by Brent Jacobs, Leon KorvingLeon KorvingWetsus, European centre of excellence for sustainable water technology, Oostergoweg 9, 8911 MA Leeuwarden, The NetherlandsMore by Leon Korving, Charlotte KjærgaardCharlotte KjærgaardSEGES, Danish Agriculture & Food Council F.m.b.A. Nature and Environment, Agro Food Park 15, 8200 Aarhus, DenmarkMore by Charlotte Kjærgaard, Henrikki LiimatainenHenrikki LiimatainenUniversity of Oulu, Fiber and Particle Engineering, Erkki Koiso-Kanttilankatu, Oulu 90014, FinlandMore by Henrikki Liimatainenhttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-7911-2632, Mark C.M. Van LoosdrechtMark C.M. Van LoosdrechtDelft University of Technology,Department of Biotechnology, Van der Maasweg 9, 2629 HZ Delft, The NetherlandsMore by Mark C.M. Van Loosdrecht, Katrina A. MacintoshKatrina A. MacintoshThe Queen's University of Belfast, School of Biological Sciences and the Institute for Global Food Security, 19 Chlorine Gardens, Belfast, BT9 5DL, Northern IrelandMore by Katrina A. Macintoshhttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-7232-400X, Jakob MagidJakob MagidUniversity of Copenhagen, Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences, Thorvaldsensvej 40, 1871 Frederiksberg C, DenmarkMore by Jakob Magid, Frederico MaiaFrederico MaiaSmallmatek, Lda,Rua dos Canhas, 3810-075 Aveiro, PortugalMore by Frederico Maia, Julia Martin-OrtegaJulia Martin-OrtegaSustainability Research Institute, School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT Leeds, UKMore by Julia Martin-Ortega, John McGrathJohn McGrathThe Queen's University of Belfast, School of Biological Sciences and the Institute for Global Food Security, 19 Chlorine Gardens, Belfast, BT9 5DL, Northern IrelandMore by John McGrath, Roel MeulepasRoel MeulepasWetsus, European centre of excellence for sustainable water technology, Oostergoweg 9, 8911 MA Leeuwarden, The NetherlandsMore by Roel Meulepas, Michael MurryMichael MurryNVP energy ltd, Galway Technology Center, Mervue Business Park, Mervue, Galway, IrlandMore by Michael Murry, Tina-Simone NesetTina-Simone NesetLinköping University, Department of Thematic Studies-Environmental Change, SE-58183 Linköping, SwedenMore by Tina-Simone Neset, Günter NeumannGünter NeumannUniversity of Hohenheim, Institute of Crop Science (340h), Fruwirthstr. 20, 70593 Stuttgart GermanyMore by Günter Neumann, Ulla G. NielsenUlla G. NielsenDepartment of Physics, Chemistry and Pharmacy, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense M, DenmarkMore by Ulla G. Nielsenhttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-2336-3061, Per H. NielsenPer H. NielsenAalborg University, Department of Chemistry and Bioscience, Frederiks Bajers Vej 7H, 9220 Aalborg, DenmarkMore by Per H. Nielsen, Vincent O'FlahertyVincent O'FlahertyNational University of Ireland Galway, University Road, Galway, Ireland H91 TK33More by Vincent O'Flaherty, Haiyan QuHaiyan QuUniversity of Southern Denmark, Department of Chemical engineering, Biotechnology- and Environmental Technology, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense M, DenmarkMore by Haiyan Quhttp://orcid.org/0000-0001-6433-6468, Jakob SantnerJakob SantnerUniversity of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Institute of Agronomy, Konrad-Lorenz-Straße 24, 3430 Tulln an der Donau, Vienna, AustriaMore by Jakob Santnerhttp://orcid.org/0000-0003-2540-539X, Verena SeufertVerena SeufertVU University Amsterdam, Institute for Environmental Studies, De Boelelaan 1087, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The NetherlandsMore by Verena Seufert, Bryan SpearsBryan SpearsCentre for Ecology & Hydrology in Edinburgh, Penicuik, Midlothian, Scotland, U.K. EH26 0QBMore by Bryan Spears, Lindsay C. StringerLindsay C. StringerSustainability Research Institute, School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT Leeds, UKMore by Lindsay C. Stringer, Marc StutterMarc StutterThe James Hutton Institute, Environmental and Biochemical Sciences Group, Aberdeen, AB15 8QH, Scotland, U.K.More by Marc Stutter, Peter H. VerburgPeter H. VerburgVU University Amsterdam, Institute for Environmental Studies, De Boelelaan 1087, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The NetherlandsMore by Peter H. Verburg, Philipp WilfertPhilipp WilfertIPP-Kiel, Rendsburger Landstraße 196-198, D-24113 Kiel, GermanyMore by Philipp Wilfert, Paul N. WilliamsPaul N. WilliamsThe Queen's University of Belfast, School of Biological Sciences and the Institute for Global Food Security, 19 Chlorine Gardens, Belfast, BT9 5DL, Northern IrelandMore by Paul N. Williamshttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-0723-7997, and Geneviève S. MetsonGeneviève S. MetsonLinköping University, Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biology, Fysikhuset, Rum 3D.306 SE-58183 Linköping, SwedenMore by Geneviève S. MetsonCite this: Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 53, 15, 8479–8481Publication Date (Web):July 8, 2019Publication History Received12 June 2019Published online8 July 2019Published inissue 6 August 2019https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b03519Copyright © 2019 American Chemical SocietyRIGHTS & PERMISSIONSArticle Views6747Altmetric-Citations16LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICSArticle Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated. Share Add toView InAdd Full Text with ReferenceAdd Description ExportRISCitationCitation and abstractCitation and referencesMore Options Share onFacebookTwitterWechatLinked InReddit PDF (3 MB) Get e-AlertsSUBJECTS:Gel permeation chromatography,Sustainability,Water pollution,Phosphorus,Food Get e-Alerts

The inefficient use of phosphorus (P) in the food chain is a threat to the global aquatic environment and the health and well-being of citizens, and it is depleting an essential finite natural resource critical for future food security and ecosystem function. We outline a strategic framework of 5R stewardship (Re-align P inputs, Reduce P losses, Recycle P in bioresources, Recover P in wastes, and Redefine P in food systems) to help identify and deliver a range of integrated, cost-effective, and feasible technological innovations to improve P use efficiency in society and reduce Europe’s dependence on P imports. Their combined adoption facilitated by interactive policies, co-operation between upstream and downstream stakeholders (researchers, investors, producers, distributors, and consumers), and more harmonized approaches to P accounting would maximize the resource and environmental benefits and help deliver a more competitive, circular, and sustainable European economy. The case of Europe provides a blueprint for global P stewardship.

Global society faces serious "phosphorus challenges" given the scarcity, essentiality, unequal global distribution and, at the same time, regional excess of phosphorus (P). Phosphorus flow studies can be used to analyze these challenges, providing insight into how society (re)uses and loses phosphorus, identifying potential solutions. Phosphorus flows were analyzed in detail for EU-27 and its Member States. To quantify food system and non-food flows, country specific data and historical context were considered. The sectors covered were crop production (CP), animal production (AP), food processing (FP), non-food production (NF) and consumption (HC). The results show that the EU-27 imported 2392 Gg P in 2005, half of which accumulated in agricultural soils (924 Gg) and half was lost as waste (1217 Gg). Net accumulation was 4.9 kg P/ha/year ranging between +23.2 (Belgium) and -2.8 (Slovakia). From the system losses, 54% was lost from HC in diverse waste flows and 28% from FP, mainly through incinerated slaughter residues. The largest HC losses (655 Gg) were wastewater (55%), food waste (27%), and pet excreta (11%). Phosphorus recycling rates were 73% in AP, 29% in FP, 21% in HC and ~0% in NF. The phosphorus use efficiencies showed that, relative to sector input, about 70% was taken up by crops (CP), 24% was retained in animals (AP), 52% was contained in food products (FP), 76% was stored in non-food materials (NF), and 21% was recycled (HC). Although wide-ranging variation between countries, generally phosphorus use in EU-27 was characterized by relatively (1) large dependency on (primary) imports, (2) long-term accumulation in agricultural soils, especially in west European countries, (3) leaky losses throughout entire society, especially emissions to the environment and sequestered waste, (4) little recycling with the exception of manure, and (5) low use efficiencies, because of aforementioned issues, providing ample opportunities for improvement.

Food production in Europe is dependent on imported phosphorus (P) fertilizers, but P use is inefficient and losses to the environment high. Here, we discuss possible solutions by changes in P management. We argue that not only the use of P fertilizers and P additives in feed could be reduced by fine-tuning fertilization and feeding to actual nutrient requirements, but also P from waste has to be completely recovered and recycled in order to close the P balance of Europe regionally and become less dependent on the availability of P-rock reserves. Finally, climate-smart P management measures are needed, to reduce the expected deterioration of surface water quality resulting from climate-change-induced P loss.

We live in a global phosphorus (P) system paradox. P access is becoming increasingly limiting, leading to food insecurity but at the same time an over-application or abundance of P in many agricultural and urban settings is causing environmental degradation. This has been recognised in the academic literature and at regulatory levels, but swift action and multi-level cooperation of all stakeholders is required to ensure the economically, environmentally and socially responsible use of P. To provide foundations for future cooperation, a conceptual model describing the elements of P need, P availability and P use in different systems and at different scales was developed during the Young Scientists Workshop in P Week 2014 in Montpellier, France. Here we describe our extended conceptual model and a theoretical P balance calculation tool for describing multi-scale P balances and imbalances to impartially advise all stakeholders on more sustainable P use across the world.

The sustainability of global phosphorus (P) use is emerging as a major societal goal to secure future food, energy, and water security for a growing population. Phosphate rock (PR) is a critical raw material whose inefficiency of use is leading to widespread eutrophication and uncertainties about supplies of affordable fertilizers. Green chemistry and green engineering can be applied to help close the global P cycle by addressing three sustainability challenges: (1) consume less PR and with greater efficiency, (2) minimise P losses and generation of waste P that can no longer be re-used, and (3) set economically, socially and environmentally acceptable P sustainability targets to lower P demand. Greater precision in P use by the agriculture sector (the main P flow) supported by smarter PR mining and processing technology could greatly improve global P use efficiency. Emerging bio-based and green chemical technologies could be more widely applied to enhance first-and second-generation valorization of low-grade PR ores, manures, by-products and residues to provide renewable secondary sources of P and other essential elements and compounds. All sectors of society have the potential to lower their P demands, and all production systems could be redesigned to facilitate recovery and recycling of P. Collectively these ` green engineering' actions at sector and regional level can help achieve planetary P sustainability.

This chapter identifies the possible phosphorus flows that might be intercepted in recovery and reuse efforts. It examines current practices of phosphorus intercepting from landfills, waterways, and non-arable lands. It explores possibilities of retrofitting or reinventing physical infrastructure to enhance interception and recovery of phosphorus from waste streams of humans and livestock. It also considers the allied benefits and trade-offs obtained with phosphorus recovery and reuse projects.