Systematic review report(s) with meta-analysis of eco technology effectiveness

The report evaluates two ecotechnologies for nutrient recovery from anaerobic digestate: struvite precipitation and ammonia stripping. Findings indicate that struvite precipitation is highly effective, particularly around pH 9.5 and with a magnesium-to-limiting-reactant ratio up to 4:1. Struvite is found to be a suitable phosphorus fertiliser for various crops, often yielding results comparable to mineral fertilisers. Ammonia stripping is also identified as effective, though the evidence base is too heterogeneous for quantitative synthesis. The review highlights a need for more field-scale and long-term validation of these technologies, especially within the Baltic Sea Region.

• Struvite precipitation effectiveness is significantly influenced by pH and the magnesium (Mg) to limiting reactant ratio, with a non-linear response to pH that peaks around pH 9.5.
• Increasing the Mg to limiting reactant ratio positively affects nutrient removal, with efficiencies reaching nearly 100% at a 4:1 ratio, although high efficiencies are also achieved at a 1:1 ratio.
• Struvite is an effective phosphorus fertiliser for a wide range of crops, including cereals and grasses, typically producing yields and phosphorus uptake comparable to conventional mineral P fertilisers.
• Ammonia stripping is an effective technique for nitrogen recovery, but the available evidence is too heterogeneous and the dataset too small to determine the specific influence of process parameters on outcomes.
• The evidence base for ammonium sulphate as a fertiliser is extremely limited, consisting of only one valid study, which found it to be an effective addition to urea for spring wheat and sugar beet in the USA.
• Current research on struvite as a fertiliser is heavily biased toward small-scale pot experiments, with a critical lack of long-term, field-scale validation and data on soil phosphorus content.

APA

Macura, B., Ahlström, M., Kämäri, M., Ksiezniak, M., Lorick, D., Osuch, P., Piniewski, M., & Tattari, S. (2019). Systematic review report(s) with meta-analysis of eco technology effectiveness. Stockholm Environment Institute. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/systematic.pdf

Chicago

Macura, Biljana, Marcus Ahlström, Maria Kämäri, Marta Ksiezniak, Dag Lorick, Pawel Osuch, Mikołaj Piniewski, and Sirkka Tattari. Systematic review report(s) with meta-analysis of eco technology effectiveness. Stockholm Environment Institute, 2019. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/systematic.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Macura |first1=Biljana |last2=Ahlström |first2=Marcus |last3=Kämäri |first3=Maria |last4=Ksiezniak |first4=Marta |last5=Lorick |first5=Dag |last6=Osuch |first6=Pawel |last7=Piniewski |first7=Mikołaj |last8=Tattari |first8=Sirkka |title=Systematic review report(s) with meta-analysis of eco technology effectiveness |publisher=Stockholm Environment Institute |date=31 December 2019 |url=https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/systematic.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{macura2019systematic, author = {Macura, Biljana and Ahlström, Marcus and Kämäri, Maria and Ksiezniak, Marta and Lorick, Dag and Osuch, Pawel and Piniewski, Mikołaj and Tattari, Sirkka}, title = {{Systematic review report(s) with meta-analysis of eco technology effectiveness}}, institution = {Stockholm Environment Institute}, year = {2019}, month = dec, url = {https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/systematic.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }