Assessment of Struvite as an Alternative Sources of Fertilizer-Phosphorus for Flood-Irrigated Rice

Kristofor R. Brye, Niyi S. Omidire, Leah English, Ranjan Parajuli, Laszlo Kekedy-Nagy, Ruhi Sultana, Jennie Popp, Greg Thoma, Trenton L. Roberts and Lauren F. Greenlee
Additional contact information
Kristofor R. Brye: Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA
Niyi S. Omidire: Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA
Ranjan Parajuli: Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA
Laszlo Kekedy-Nagy: Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA
Ruhi Sultana: Department of Chemical Engineering, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA 16802, USA
Greg Thoma: Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA
Trenton L. Roberts: Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA
Lauren F. Greenlee: Department of Chemical Engineering, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA 16802, USA

Sustainability, 2022, vol. 14, issue 15, 1-21

Abstract: Phosphorus (P) recovery from wastewaters as struvite (MgNH 4 PO 4 ·6H 2 O) may be a viable alternative fertilizer-P source for agriculture. The objective of this study was to evaluate the economic and environmental implications of struvite as a fertilizer-P source for flood-irrigated rice ( Oryza sativa ) relative to other commonly used commercially available fertilizer-P sources. A field study was conducted in 2019 and 2020 to evaluate the effects of wastewater-recovered struvite (chemically precipitated struvite (CPST) and electrochemically precipitated struvite (ECST)) on rice yield response in a P-deficient, silt–loam soil in eastern Arkansas relative to triple superphosphate, monoammonium and diammonium phosphate, and rock phosphate. A life cycle assessment methodology was used to estimate the global warming potentials associated with rice produced with the various fertilizer-P sources. Life cycle inventory data were based on the field trials conducted with and without struvite application for both years. A partial budget analysis showed that, across both years, net revenues for ECST and CPST were 1.4 to 26.8% lower than those associated with the other fertilizer-P sources. The estimated greenhouse gas emissions varied between 0.58 and 0.70 kg CO 2 eq kg rice −1 from CPST and between 0.56 and 0.81 kg CO 2 eq kg rice −1 from ECST in 2019 and 2020, respectively, which were numerically similar to those for the other fertilizer-P sources in 2019 and 2020. The similar rice responses compared to commercially available fertilizer-P sources suggest that wastewater-recovered struvite materials might be an alternative fertilizer-P-source option for flood-irrigated rice production if struvite can become price-competitive to other fertilizer-P sources.

Keywords: chemically precipitated struvite; electrochemically precipitated struvite; Arkansas; life cycle analysis; economic analysis; rice production; plant nutrients (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/15/9621/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/15/9621/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:15:p:9621-:d:880633

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().